Local
Maryland trans bill set to die in committee
Lawmakers linked it to marriage, opposed two ‘gay bills’ in one year
Dana Beyer, executive director of Gender Rights Maryland, blamed Senate President Thomas V. Miller (D-Prince George’s and Calvert Counties) for the trans bill’s demise. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
A bill in the Maryland Legislature aimed at banning discrimination against transgender people in the areas of employment, housing and public accommodations is expected to die in committee on Monday, ending chances for passing it for the sixth year in a row.
The Gender Identity Non-Discrimination Act, SB 212, is stalled in the legislature’s Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, with no indication that Senate leaders plan to bring it up for a vote by March 26. That date has been long established as the deadline for one of the legislature’s two bodies to approve all bills in time for consideration by the other body.
“I actually feel the political atmosphere has improved markedly for gender identity civil rights,” said Sen. Jamie Raskin (D-Montgomery County), one of the lead sponsors of the bill.
“But the problem is we did same-sex marriage and for some unfathomable reason people seem to think we can’t do both of these bills in the same session,” Raskin told the Blade. “As a number of members said to me, we can’t do two gay bills in one session.”
Raskin was referring to the Maryland Legislature’s approval earlier this year of the Civil Marriage Protection Act, which calls for legalizing same-sex marriage in the state. That bill is expected to come before voters in a referendum in November.
Raskin and other longtime supporters of the transgender bill say they have tried repeatedly to dispel the view that the trans measure is a “gay” bill or that it’s linked to same-sex marriage.
Dana Beyer, executive director of Gender Rights Maryland, a statewide transgender advocacy organization that led efforts to pass the trans bill this year, blamed Senate President Thomas V. “Mike” Miller (D-Prince George’s and Calvert Counties) for the bill’s demise. According to Beyer, knowledgeable sources at the state capital in Annapolis say Miller put out the word that the bill should not come up for a vote.
Beyer noted that Miller’s stance is the opposite of the posture he took on the marriage bill. Miller voted against the marriage bill but allowed it to come up for a vote and reportedly blocked efforts to derail the bill with a filibuster.
“If Miller doesn’t want it, it doesn’t happen,” Beyer said. “It doesn’t matter what the other senators want.”
Other advocates for the bill, who asked not to be identified, said they believe Miller was blocking a vote on the bill in committee because he believes it doesn’t have the votes to pass and he prefers not to have Democratic leaders lose on a controversial vote like this one.
Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee Chair Brian Frosh (D-Montgomery County) has authority under Senate rules to bring all bills up for a vote in his committee. Beyer and others sharing her view believe Frosh defers to Miller on controversial bills such as the transgender measure, even though his constituents in progressive-leaning Montgomery County support the bill.
“Miller said I will let the marriage bill come to a vote and I will protect it, I will prevent a filibuster,” Beyer said. “I won’t vote for it but I will not allow people to kill it. If he would do that for us we would get our bill passed.”
Miller, Frosh and spokespersons for the two failed to immediately return calls
Last year, the Maryland House of Delegates approved a version of the Gender Identity Non-Discrimination Act that lacked a public accommodations provision. Supporters in the House said they didn’t believe it could pass with such a provision. The bill died in the Senate last year after most supporters joined opponents and voted to pull it from the Senate floor and send it back to committee.
This year, at the strong request of Gender Identity Maryland, the bill’s sponsors agreed to include the public accommodations clause. House leaders announced earlier this year that they would not go through the exercise of passing it again only to have it defeated in the Senate. So they decided to not bring up the bill until or unless it first cleared the Senate.
One supporter asking not to be identified said bringing the bill to the Senate, which couldn’t pass it last year, with a public accommodations clause made it “that much more difficult” to secure Senate passage this year.
Asked if he thought the trans bill could pass in the Senate this year if it were brought up for a vote, Raskin said, “I haven’t done any kind of whip count on it. But my gut tells me the votes are there – narrowly, but they’re there.”
Raskin added, “I am still hopeful that we can pull a rabbit out of the hat before the end of the session. And if not, I’m feeling very good about the prospects for passage next year.”
Carrie Evans, executive director of the statewide LGBT group Equality Maryland, said at the request of Gender Rights Maryland, her group didn’t take the lead role in lobbying for the trans bill this year.
“Of course it’s disappointing,” Evans said. “This is one of our highest priorities – to pass this bill. We continue just like with marriage. We clearly don’t give up. We’re going to regroup and we have a strong coalition working on this bill.”
State Sen. Rich Madaleno (D-Montgomery County), who is gay and another of the lead supporters of the transgender bill, couldn’t be immediately reached for comment. Last year Madaleno strongly criticized his colleagues’ decision to send the bill back to committee rather than bring it up for a floor vote.
Beyer and Jenna Fischetti, director of the Baltimore-based advocacy group TransMaryland, said that while transgender non-discrimination legislation has stalled in the state legislature, trans non-discrimination bills have passed in four important jurisdictions in the state, including Montgomery County, Howard County, Baltimore County and Baltimore City.
The two said those non-discrimination measures cover close to 50 percent of the state’s population. Beyer said she believes 95 percent of the state’s transgender people live in those four jurisdictions.
“So in that respect, practically speaking, we’ve done the job,” Beyer said.
District of Columbia
D.C. Council urged to improve ‘weakened’ PrEP insurance bill
AIDS group calls for changes before full vote on Feb. 3
The D.C.-based HIV + Hepatitis Policy Institute is calling on the D.C. Council to reverse what it says was the “unfortunate” action by a Council committee to weaken a bill aimed at requiring health insurance companies to cover the costs of HIV prevention or PrEP drugs for D.C. residents at risk for HIV infection.
HIV + HEP Policy Institute Executive Director Carl Schmid points out in a Jan. 30 email message to all 13 D.C. Council members that the Council’s Committee on Health on Dec. 8, 2025, voted to change the PrEP DC Act of 2025, Bill 26-0159, to require insurers to fully cover only one PrEP drug regimen.
Schmid noted the bill as originally written and introduced Feb. 28, 2025, by Council member Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5), the Council’s only gay member, required insurers to cover all PrEP drugs, including the newest PrEP medication taken by injection once every six months.
Schmid’s message to the Council members was sent on Friday, Jan. 30, just days before the Council was scheduled to vote on the bill on Feb. 3. He contacted the Washington Blade about his concerns about the bill as changed by committee that same day.
Spokespersons for Parker and the Committee on Health and its chairperson, Council member Christina Henderson (I-At-Large) didn’t immediately respond to the Blade’s request for comment on the issue, saying they were looking into the matter and would try to provide a response on Monday, Jan. 2.
In his message to Council members, Schmid also noted that he and other AIDS advocacy groups strongly supported the committee’s decision to incorporate into the bill a separate measure introduced by Council member Brooke Pinto (D-Ward 2) that would prohibit insurers, including life insurance companies, from denying coverage to people who are on PrEP.
“We appreciate the Committee’s revisions to the bill that incorporates Bill 26-0101, which prohibits discrimination by insurance carriers based on PrEP use,” Schmid said in his statement to all Council members.
“However, the revised PrEP coverage provision would actually reduce PrEP options for D.C. residents that are required by current federal law, limit patient choice, and place D.C. behind states that have enacted HIV prevention policies designed to remain in effect regardless of any federal changes,” Schmid added.
He told the Washington Blade that although these protections are currently provided through coverage standards recommended in the U.S. Affordable Care Act, AIDS advocacy organizations have called for D.C. and states to pass their own legislation requiring insurance coverage of PrEP in the event that the federal policies are weakened or removed by the Trump administration, which has already reduced or ended federal funding for HIV/AIDS-related programs.
“The District of Columbia has always been a leader in the fight against HIV,” Schmid said in a statement to Council members. But in a separate statement he sent to the Blade, Schmid said the positive version of the bill as introduced by Parker and the committee’s incorporation of the Pinto bill were in stark contrast to the “bad side — the bill would only require insurers to cover one PrEP drug.”
He added, “That is far worse than current federal requirements. Obviously, the insurers got to them.”
The Committee on Health’s official report on the bill summarizes testimony in support of the bill by health-related organizations, including Whitman-Walker Health, and two D.C. government officials before the committee at an Oct. 30, 2025, public hearing.
Among them were Clover Barnes, Senior Deputy Director of the D.C. HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis, STD, and TB Administration, and Philip Barlow, Associate Commissioner for the D.C. Department of Insurance, Securities, and Banking.
Although both Barnes and Barlow expressed overall support for the bill, Barlow suggested several changes, one of which could be related to the committee’s change of the bill described by Schmid, according to the committee report.
“First, he recommended changing the language that required PrEP and PEP coverage by insurers to instead require that insurers who already cover PrEP and PEP do not impose cost sharing or coverage more restrictive than other treatments,” the committee report states. “He pointed out that D.C. insurers already cover PrEP and PEP as preventive services, and this language would avoid unintended costs for the District,” the report adds.
PEP refers to Post-Exposure Prophylaxis medication, while PrEP stands for Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis medication.
In response to a request from the Blade for comment, Daniel Gleick, Mayor Muriel Bowser’s press secretary, said he would inquire about the issue in the mayor’s office.
Naseema Shafi, Whitman-Walker Health’s CEO, meanwhile, in response to a request by the Blade for comment, released a statement sharing Schmid’s concerns about the current version of the PrEP DC Act of 2025, which the Committee on Health renamed as the PrEP DC Amendment Act of 2025.
“Whitman-Walker Health believes that all residents of the District of Columbia should have access to whatever PrEP method is best for them based on their conversations with their providers,” Shafi said. “We would not want to see limitations on what insurers would cover,” she added. “Those kinds of limitations lead to significantly reduced access and will be a major step backwards, not to mention undermining the critical progress that the Affordable Care Act enabled for HIV prevention,” she said.
The Blade will update this story as soon as additional information is obtained from the D.C. Council members involved with the bill, especially Parker. The Blade will report on whether the full Council makes the changes to the bill requested by Schmid and others before it votes on whether to approve it at its Feb. 3 legislative session.
By PAMELA WOOD | Dan Cox, a Republican who was resoundingly defeated by Democratic Gov. Wes Moore four years ago, has filed to run for governor again this year.
Cox’s candidacy was posted on the Maryland elections board website Friday; he did not immediately respond to an interview request.
Cox listed Rob Krop as his running mate for lieutenant governor.
The rest of this article can be found on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
Maryland
Expanded PrEP access among FreeState Justice’s 2026 legislative priorities
Maryland General Assembly opened on Jan. 14
FreeState Justice this week spoke with the Washington Blade about their priorities during this year’s legislative session in Annapolis that began on Jan. 14.
Ronnie L. Taylor, the group’s community director, on Wednesday said the organization continues to fight against discrimination against people with HIV/AIDS. FreeState Justice is specifically championing a bill in the General Assembly that would expand access to PrEP in Maryland.
Taylor said FreeState Justice is working with state Del. Ashanti Martinez (D-Prince George’s County) and state Sen. Clarence Lam (D-Arundel and Howard Counties) on a bill that would expand the “scope of practice for pharmacists in Maryland to distribute PrEP.” The measure does not have a title or a number, but FreeState Justice expects it will have both in the coming weeks.
FreeState Justice has long been involved in the fight to end the criminalization of HIV in the state.
Governor Wes Moore last year signed House Bill 39, which decriminalized HIV in Maryland.
The bill — the Carlton R. Smith Jr. HIV Modernization Act — is named after Carlton Smith, a long-time LGBTQ activist known as the “mayor” of Baltimore’s Mount Vernon neighborhood who died in 2024. FreeState Justice said Marylanders prosecuted under Maryland Health-General Code § 18-601.1 have already seen their convictions expunged.
Taylor said FreeState Justice will continue to “oppose anti anti-LGBTQ legislation” in the General Assembly. Their website later this week will publish a bill tracker.
The General Assembly’s legislative session is expected to end on April 13.
LGBTQ Minnesotans speak out amid ICE crackdowns
D.C. Council urged to improve ‘weakened’ PrEP insurance bill
Dan Cox files for governor, seeking rematch with Moore
Unconventional homes becoming more popular
Out dancer on Alvin Ailey’s stint at Warner Theatre
Two gay men face deportation to Iran
Van Sant returns with gripping ‘Dead Man’s Wire’
‘Pillion’ director on bikers, BDSM, and importance of being seen
PHOTOS: SMYAL for the New Year
