by Matthew Holloway | Mar 23, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona Senate Republicans advanced legislation last week addressing insurance coverage requirements and the use of taxpayer funds for gender transition procedures.
The legislative package includes Senate Bills 1014 and 1177. The measures passed the Arizona Senate and now move to the House for further consideration.
SB 1014, sponsored by Sen. Janae Shamp (R-LD29), would require health insurers that provide coverage for gender transition procedures to also cover gender detransition procedures. The bill also requires certain healthcare providers who perform transition procedures to provide detransition care and establishes reporting requirements related to those services.
“If insurance companies are going to profit from covering gender transition procedures, they must also take responsibility for the continuum of care – including detransition,” Shamp said in a statement.
“We are hearing more and more stories from individuals who feel misled, who regret these procedures, and who are left without support when they seek to reverse course. That is unacceptable,” she added. “This legislation ensures that patients are not abandoned and that insurers cannot pick and choose coverage based on convenience or ideology. If they’re going to cover the front end, they must cover the consequences on the back end. That’s not just policy – that’s basic fairness and accountability.”
Under the legislation, insurers would be required to submit reports to the Arizona Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions detailing claims related to detransition procedures, including demographic and procedural information, while prohibiting the disclosure of personally identifiable data.
The proposal also includes provisions requiring state agencies to establish processes that allow individuals undergoing detransition to update official documents reflecting name, sex, or gender changes.
SB 1177, sponsored by Sen. Wendy Rogers (R-LD7), would prohibit the use of public funds for gender transition procedures.
The Senate Republican Caucus stated that both measures are intended to address healthcare policy and insurance practices related to gender transition and detransition services.
The bills are part of a broader set of proposals considered by the Arizona Legislature this session related to gender transition procedures and healthcare policy.
If approved by the House and signed into law, SB 1014 would become effective on January 1, 2027. If signed into law, SB 1177 would take effect on Arizona’s general effective date, typically 90 days after the Legislature adjourns for the session.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Tiffany Benson | Mar 10, 2026 | Opinion
By Tiffany Benson |
When asked, “What was the original purpose of public education?” A.I. gave this response:
The original purpose of public education in the U.S. focused on fostering a literate, cohesive, and obedient citizenry to support a new democracy, ensure social order, and provide basic religious instruction.
Since at least 1962, public education has been heavily influenced by secularists. As a result, students are not literate or cohesive, and their obedience has been co-opted into secrecy and rebellion against parents. Of course, democracy means mob rule.
How did we get here?
One obvious answer lies in the worldview of secular humanism. The ideologies of this religion threatens to turn innocent children into a godless, genderless, enraged monolith. Secularism is a parasite that causes symptoms of mental illness, moral confusion, and self-induced hysteria. Parasitic infestations have three phases: growth, reproduction, and transmission.
The growth of secularism in K-12 education manifests as:
- Social emotional learning (SEL)
- Evolutionary theory
- Ethnic studies (CRT)
- Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity (DIE)
- Rainbow flags and gay celebrations on campus
- The acknowledgement and acceptance of every religion but Christianity
The reproduction of secularism in K-12 education manifests as:
- Law enforcement protests during educational hours
- Counselors secretly transitioning students’ gender
- Sex education for kindergarteners
- Children judging their peers by skin color
- School officials referring minors to abortion clinics
- Boys invading girls’ sports and private spaces
The transmission of secularism from K-12 education to society manifests as:
- High school graduates with little to no reading, writing, or math skills
- Increased sexual activity, STDs, and unwed pregnancies among youth
- High abortion rates among women in their 20s
- Low IQ citizens who predominantly vote for radical policies
- Emotional immaturity, violence, and lack of personal responsibility
- Suicide and premature death
The average American child, from age 4 to 17, will spend about 14,000 hours in school. Most of these students will undergo secular brainwashing in the form of “academic standards,” “core competencies,” and state testing. Parents have been lulled into a false sense of trust, abdicating their rights and responsibilities to government workers. Even “good” educators (the conservative ones who remain fearfully silent) shouldn’t have unchecked influence over a child’s mental, emotional, or moral development.
The pervasive ignorance of secularism explains why people interpret “separation of church and state” to mean Christians can’t pray, read Scripture, or invoke the name of God publicly. Secularism is also why Americans call the United States a “democracy.” The secularist worldview is so morally inferior that it can only be defended by calling opponents racists, white supremacists, fascists, and homophobes.
The demonization of Christianity, prayer, and Bible reading has only escalated as Arizona lawmakers attempt to pass legislation that fortifies First Amendment rights and parental rights in K-12 education.
Secularists linked LifeWise Academy—an organization with a mission to offer Bible education to public school students during school hours—to Arizona House Bill 2266. Secularists claim bussing children to nearby churches for Bible studies during the school day is harmful to academic communities. But encouraging kids to walk off campus with “F— ICE” t-shirts during educational hours is okay? Only in the mind of a secularist.
Deer Valley board member and AZ legislator, Stephanie Simacek (D-LD2), called Lifewise “a controversial, far-right, religious instruction program.” Regarding HB 2266, the secularist told her constituents she would “continue to oppose bills that do nothing to serve public education.” Essentially, high moral standards, respecting authority, and taking responsibility for one’s actions have no place in taxpayer-funded, government schools.
The life’s purpose of a secularist boils down to persecuting Christians, opposing common sense legislation, and infiltrating public school systems to spread anti-Christ propaganda through immoral policies and curricula on all grade levels. Secularism is a spiritual, intellectual, and emotional drain on every generation. No child should be entrusted to an institution that’s predominantly run by godless people.
Parents must continue to seek alternative learning methods and regain control over their kids’ education. Don’t let secularism destroy their innocence and corrupt their moral character. Furthermore, taxpayers should keep rejecting bonds and overrides. Don’t incentivize sleazy administrators and weak board members to advance a secular agenda. Let the schools close and the buildings be repurposed. The kids will be fine if more parents and silent educators step up.
Public education—especially in Arizona—is a colossal failure. The lie of “separation of church and state” must be exposed. Steering children back to God is the only way to defeat secularism and defend our Constitutional Republic. Support constitutional legislation like AZ House Bill 2266 and the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA). Support Christian organizations like LifeWise Academy. Most importantly, support parental rights in K-12 education for all American families.
Tiffany Benson is the founder of Restore Parental Rights in Education and host of The Myth of Education Podcast. Her commentaries on public education and Christian faith can be viewed at Parentspayattention.com and Bigviewsmallwindow.com. All views and opinions expressed by Tiffany are her own.
by Staff Reporter | Mar 1, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The Arizona House has passed a bill banning gender transitions for minors.
HB 2085 not only bans gender transition procedures to minors, it bans referrals and distribution of public funding to gender transition procedures. The bill defined procedures to include puberty blockers and hormone replacement drugs.
The legislation did include exemptions for individuals who were born with sex development disorders; who were endangered due to a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness; or who sustained an infection, injury, disease, or disorder caused or exacerbated by a gender transition procedure.
It is likely this bill is dead on arrival should it pass the Senate and hit the governor’s desk. Gov. Katie Hobbs supports gender transition procedures for minors, and her husband, Patrick Goodman, assisted children with gender transitions as a Phoenix Children’s Hospital Gender Support Program counselor.
The partisan divide was clear during House floor arguments for and against the bill.
Democrats argued HB 2085 violates parental and medical freedom.
Rep. Nancy Gutierrez (D-LD18), assistant minority leader, claimed parents had the right to decide for their children to transition their children.
Rep. Betty Villegas (D-LD20) argued puberty blockers and hormone therapies should be acceptable for gender transitions since they’re used to treat other ailments and defects.
Rep. Janeen Connolly (D-LD8) said gender transitions were a personal decision that should be beyond the scope of lawmakers. Connolly shared that one of her grandchildren, now 17 and identifying as “they/them,” had transitioned genders at 12 years old.
Rep. Stephanie Simacek (D-LD2) argued these decisions to transition genders weren’t made in haste since minors relied on parental consent to make the decision.
Across the aisle, Republicans argued the gender transitions of minors amounted to child abuse.
Rep. Lisa Fink (R-LD27), the bill sponsor, argued that allowing the puberty process to occur uninhibited was the prevailing treatment for gender dysphoria. Fink read off the myriad adverse health effects of puberty blockers and hormone replacement medications when applied to healthy children seeking gender transitions.
Rep. Rachel Keshel (R-LD17) accused those in support of gender transitions for minors of being inconsistent in their logic.
“It is my opinion that a parent that allows a child to permanently alter their body and potentially take away their ability to be parent one day, that is child abuse,” said Keshel.
Rep. Pamela Carter (R-LD4) countered that gender transitions don’t qualify as valid healthcare, and therefore not within the acceptable bounds of health decisions parents may make on behalf of their children.
“The physicians even now are stopping some of these procedures because they see the results of what happens to a minor when they realize what has happened: they cannot have children, or they are marred physically, emotionally for life,” said Carter. “Parents should be in charge of their children’s health, but to me this is not healthcare.”
Rep. Alexander Kolodin (R-LD3) questioned how Democrats could support irreversible procedures for minors given the universal agreement on age limits for other activities.
“Point of fact, there are many things our society does not allow minors to do: we don’t allow minors, at least up to a certain age, to drive. We don’t allow them to vote. We don’t allow them to drink. We don’t allow them to smoke,” said Kolodin. “We don’t even allow them to get tattoos because we’re worried that one day they will regret that decision. How much more so then should we not allow minors to engage in elective surgery that permanently disfigures them?”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Ethan Faverino | Feb 25, 2026 | Education, News
By Ethan Faverino |
The Arizona House of Representatives passed HCR 2003, the Protect Girls’ Sports in Arizona Act, on February 23, 2026, in a vote of 32 ayes to 25 nays.
Sponsored by Rep. Selina Bliss (R-LD1), the measure now advances to the Arizona Senate. If approved by the Senate, it would refer the proposed law to Arizona voters for consideration on the November 2026 general election ballot.
HCR 2003 seeks to require schools and athletic associations to designate interscholastic and intramural athletic teams or sports as “males/men/boys,” “females/women/girls,” or “coeducational/mixed,” based on an individual’s biological sex as recorded at birth on the original birth certificate. Teams designated for females would not be open to biological male athletes.
The resolution also includes stronger privacy protections, prohibiting schools and athletic associations from authorizing individuals to use restrooms, locker rooms, shower rooms, or other private athletic facilities not designated for their biological sex, effective January 1, 2027.
The measure restores and strengthens elements of Arizona’s 2022 Save Women’s Sports Act (SB 1165), which faced partial blocks by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, creating uncertainty for schools, families, and athletes.
“Today the House acted to protect fair competition for girls across Arizona,” stated Rep. Bliss. “Women’s sports were created because biological differences matter. When those differences are ignored, girls lose roster spots, scholarships, and opportunities they earned. HCR 2003 gives voters the chance to protect female athletes and establish clear, durable rules for schools.”
Additional provisions of the proposed law include:
- Allowing athletes to participate on teams aligned with their biological sex or on coeducational teams.
- Prohibiting government entities, licensing organizations, accrediting bodies, or athletic associations from taking adverse action against schools or associations that maintain separate teams for female athletes.
- Providing a private cause of action for athletes deprived of opportunities or harmed by violations, including for injunctive relief, damages (including for psychological, emotional, or physical harm), attorney fees, and costs.
- Protecting against retaliation for reporting violations, with similar legal remedies available.
- Applying to public and qualifying private schools serving K-12.
“Court rulings have created uncertainty for schools and families,” Rep. Bliss added. “This referral allows Arizona voters to decide whether girls’ sports should remain for girls. It protects privacy in locker rooms and showers and restores clarity statewide.”
HCR 2003 now heads to the Arizona Senate for further consideration. If approved, it will be on this year’s general election ballot.
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Feb 23, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The Republican-led Senate is poised to vote on multiple bills that would impose greater restrictions on gender transition procedures in Arizona.
The Senate Health and Human Services Committee passed four bills targeting different aspects of gender transition procedures: Senate Bills 1014, 1177, 1094, and 1095. All with the exception of SB 1095 were heard in committee last week. All were passed without the support of Democratic lawmakers.
Progressive activists lined up to testify against the bills during the several committee hearings.
SB1095, which would ban gender transition procedures for minors, provoked testimony from several activist adults who identify as transgender.
Former Liberty Elementary School District governing board member, Paul Bixler, said SB1095 would harm, not help, children. Bixler, a man, identifies as a transgender woman.
Ruth Carter, an attorney, said SB1095 amounted to discrimination. Carter, a woman, identifies as a nonbinary individual.
Marilyn Rodriguez, Creosote Partners founder and lobbyist representing the ACLU, said SB1095 was impermissibly broad as written.
Sen. Lauren Kuby (D-LD8) called the bill discriminatory, and argued that lawmakers shouldn’t ban gender transition procedures since certain healthcare experts support those procedures as treatments for gender dysphoria.
“These are private, personal decisions, healthcare decisions, we shouldn’t be discriminating against transgendered youth or those who have gender dysphoria as is described,” said Kuby.
Sen. Analise Ortiz (D-LD24) said the legislature would be better focusing on making healthcare more affordable. Ortiz said the legislation was not only discriminatory but violative of parental rights laws.
“It bans healthcare for a specific group of people solely based on gender identity; that is discrimination no matter how you want to paint it,” said Ortiz.
Sen. Mark Finchem (R-LD1), the bill sponsor, disputed the narratives of his Democratic colleagues that healthcare experts were to be trusted fully and that gender transition procedures were appropriate for minors.
“To those who worship the grounds that doctors walk on: they also said cigarettes were good for you,” said Finchem. “[Permanently altering treatments like mastectomies] are decisions that kids are being talked into, in some cases. I didn’t just dream this bill up myself. This came from kids and parents. More kids than parents.”
Majority Leader John Kavanagh (R-LD3) questioned the logic of his Democratic colleagues that parents had a right to submit children to irreversible medical treatments, but not the right to decide whether their children should be called by certain pronouns or alternative names in school.
SB 1014 would require health insurers to offer coverage for detransition procedures should those insurers provide coverage for gender transition procedures. It would also issue reporting requirements on insurance claims for gender detransitions.
“Detransitioners are people too; they deserve the same care as those who are manipulated into believing they have gender dysphoria, which leads them to undergo gender transition surgery that they later regret,” said the bill sponsor, Sen. Janae Shamp (R-LD29), in a press release. “This legislative package puts their long-term well-being above politics and ideology.”
Jeanne Woodbury, a lobbyist for the ACLU, argued the reporting requirements within the bill would result in discriminatory outcomes.
Bixler, the transgender-identifying former school board member, claimed the bill would result in providers refusing to provide gender transition procedures.
SB 1177 would ban public funding for gender transition procedures.
Sen. Wendy Rogers (R-LD7), the bill sponsor, explained during Wednesday’s HHS hearing that she discovered taxpayers were funding gender transition treatments for prisoners. Rogers also discovered that individuals were being arrested on purpose in order to receive free gender transition treatments.
“Taxpayer dollars should never be used to bankroll irreversible procedures on children,” said Rogers in a later press release. “This legislation draws a hard line and makes clear that public funds will not subsidize experimental or life-altering interventions on minors.”
Ashton Allen expressed support on behalf of Center for Arizona Policy. Allen said subsidies should be tied to valid medical treatments, which he said gender transition procedures weren’t.
Woodbury, the transgender-identifying ACLU lobbyist, argued against Rogers’ claims and said the treatments were affordable. Woodbury also said an end to subsidization would lead to excessive medical risks associated with forced detransitions.
Minority Whip Rosanna Gabaldon (D-LD21) said ending subsidies was “extreme and punitive,” as well as “unfair and dangerous.”
Sen. Sally Ann Gonzales (D-LD20) accused Rogers of faking a story that individuals were getting themselves arrested in order to receive free gender transition treatments. Gonzales called the bill discriminatory.
Sen. Shamp questioned why drugs historically considered to be dangerous were suddenly ethical in the context of gender reassignment.
“Lupron was deemed cruel and unusual punishment being utilized in the prison system for sex offenders, rapists. But now we want Arizona taxpayers to pay for that drug to be utilized for gender reassignment? How the heck did we get here?” said Shamp.
SB 1094 would allow individuals to seek damages in court against physicians who performed gender reassignment surgeries on them as minors. Kavanagh sponsored the bill.
“When permanent procedures are performed on minors who suffer harm, there must be consequences,” said Kavanagh in a press release. “These reforms restore transparency and provide a pathway to just compensation for those harmed.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Page 2 of 10«12345678910»
