After seeing a political ad in the Sentinel in the March 3 edition (see the featured image above) sponsored by the Republican Party of Sierra County that attacks Tara Jaramillo, Democrat, District 38 House Representative, I called her office to see what the ad was referencing, since no context was given.
A staff member said they were familiar with the ad and weren’t sure, but suspected it related to House Bill 7. Jaramillo and other House Democrats who supported the bill were being inundated with emails restating the ad’s misconceptions, the originating message coming from oneclickpolitics.com—“the leading non-partisan, grassroots advocacy technology, advocate acquisition, and grassroots campaign management company,” according to its website.
It’s almost impossible to do a fact-check on the ad, since it twists the bill’s intent to protect LGBTQ people’s rights and the rights of those seeking abortions as an attack on parents’ rights and conscientious objectors’ rights.
I called and emailed the Republican Party of Sierra County on Monday, March 6, and asked them to cite their sources for the ad, using contact information listed on their website. Johanna Tighe is stated to be the chair and Julianne Stroup the board secretary, but when Tighe answered the phone, she said Stroup was now the chair and she is now secretary. Tighe said she didn’t know the sources of the ad’s claims. She requested I send her an email she could forward to those with an answer. There was no response to my email.
Julianne Stroup is a Truth or Consequences Municipal Schools school board member. She is also a social worker with Ben Archer Health Center, who is “enrolled with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS),” according to https://opengovus.com/physician/2466629373 .
The Republican Party of Sierra County’s Facebook page offers more context to the ad’s claims. Under the same ad, posted March 1, were the following two posts:
Republican Party of Sierra County’s post:
Do you believe parents have the right to be involved when their minor children are facing an unplanned pregnancy? Want to access family planning? When they want to change their gender through chemical and surgical means?
We do. But our newly elected Representative, Jaramillo does not.
She voted to revoke current laws which give parents notification until their child is 14. She voted to force all public employees (yes your child’s elementary teacher) to face penalties and lawsuits if they don’t help facilitate access to gender transitioning, abortion, and family planning.
She voted no on amendments that would have allowed conscientious protection for public workers.
She voted no on amendments that would’ve have limited this radical law, only to consenting adults.
She voted no on amendments to protecting parent’s right to be part of these decisions for their minor children.
She voted yes on $6.5 million dollars to school health clinics to expedite the implantation of transitioning services, family planning, and abortion.
Rebecca Dow, a republican, who was District 38 House Representative before Jaramillo, posted:
Representative Jaramillo continues to disappoint. Proud of the handful of democrats whose votes reflect their district, not a radical national agenda. Today Rep Jaramillo voted against amendments to HB7 that would have;
- Informed parents when a child is seeking an abortion, or seeking to change their gender.
- Provide conscientious protection for public employees, including teachers who do not want to refer minors for abortion or help minors change their gender
- Adopt the same standard of care at abortion clinics as required for all other New Mexico outpatient centers.
In the end, she voted in favor of the most radical abortion and transgender bill in the nation.
How did your representative vote?
The bill states that no city or other public body in the state may pass legislation to discriminate against or block people who seek or do not seek reproductive health care or abortion or gender-affirming care.
The bill also states that public employees, which would include those taking Medicaid and Medicare funding, cannot block or discriminate against persons seeking or not seeking reproductive, abortion and gender-affirming health care.
The bill makes clear that nothing in the act “shall be construed to require any health care provider or entity to provide care: (1) that the health care provider or entity does not otherwise provide or have a duty to provide under state or federal law.”
Find a copy of the bill below.
The bill was approved by the House on Feb. 21 with 38 yeses and 31 noes. Two senate committees have also passed the bill so far.
House-floor amendments to force underage people to have parental permission did not pass.
Evidently legislators are listening to experts and are keeping them in control, not parents, concerning gender-affirming care for LGBTQ youth, the bill bolstering their rights.
The Trevor Project, which website states is the “leading national organization providing crisis intervention and suicide prevention among LGBTQ youth,” does regular surveys. In 2021 it surveyed 34,000 LGBTQ youth between the ages of 13 and 24. Half of the aged 13-to-17 cohort said they had “seriously considered suicide in the last year” and 18 percent made a suicide attempt. “Fewer than one-third non-binary and transgender youth said they live in a gender-affirming home,” according to the survey.
The National Alliance on Mental Illness states “LGBTQ teens are six times more likely to express symptoms of depression” than heterosexual teens and, “Researchers found family problems most often contributed to suicides among younger LGBTQ teens.”
The House-floor amendment allowing conscientious objectors to block or refuse treatment would similarly remove protections the bill seeks to impose and did not pass. No one is forcing people to become public employees or to enroll as Medicaid and Medicare providers. Go into the private sector if you object to gender-affirming care or abortions.
Dow’s and the Republican Party of Sierra County’s claim the legislation is “radical,” labels District 38 voters as radical, since a majority voted in Jaramillo, whose platform supported privacy, not government intervention in reproductive healthcare. It also makes radicals of a majority of New Mexico House members, also elected by a majority of their constituents. But radicals, by definition, have to hold a minority, fringe position, which is not the case.
Dow and the Republican Party of Sierra County are resorting to vague, confusing and distorting political ads and statements because a straight-forward pronouncement of their minority, non-popular, anti-abortion and anti-LGBTQ views haven’t worked, as shown by the mid-term election results.
They seem to be taking Steve Bannon’s advice in the wake of defeat: “The Democrats don’t matter. The real opposition is the media. And the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with shit.”
Let me ask you this, readers. Do you believe in holding parents responsible, at least in certain specific cases, when their children commit an act of gun violence? Now, what about abortions and gender affirming care? Should they be left out of the loop there, at least in certain cases?
I think we need to have an intelligent and clear discussion on principles and understand what we are doing, and why, when we make these tough decisions. Some of you, of course, think you have it all figured out already…..
I’m not getting your comparison between guns and gender-affirming care. There is no expert healthcare provider, that is, a doctor, psychologist, etc., mediating between a parent and a youth and a gun. And who says discussion and long study hasn’t been going on? In many cases, about a third, according to studies concerning trans or non-binary youth, have been rejected by their families, putting them at massive risk for suicide and/or depression and/or drug abuse. The bill protects the rights of those youths to seek gender-affirming care. Do the research on conversion therapy some–about 10 percent one study said–LGBTQ youths are forced into with disastrous results. Only in some cases are parents’ wishes overruled, not all, as the political ad and you are suggesting. This bill allows for those youths’ protection, putting experts in charge of that decision. Just as a judge, jury, expert witnesses, etc. would decide if a youth’s parents should be held responsible for their child’s illegal gun use.
Sorry you don’t “get” the comparison. I imagine others might. And I do know something about conversion therapy, the effects of bullying and despair. Quite possibly more than you. I resent the fact that you would assume anyone who disagrees with you in the slightest doesn’t have all the facts at their command.
You are cherry picking my comments and your facts to support your commentary and putting your own spin on the piece. But what else is new?
Of course I’m cherry picking. Of course I have my own spin.
We don’t communicate via War and Peace sized memos. My articles are “analysis,” my opinion, my framing of the issue, my sourcing, my editing. You obviously have a problem with that. You are certainly welcome to your opinion. But to state I shouldn’t have a spin? Shouldn’t be cherry picking? Just me or any opinion/analysis writer?
I spent a lot of time evaluating whether I should give more media space to this ad. I decided it was too dangerous to let it pass since it co-opted the HB7 legislation and reduced it and twisted it into a false equivalence similar to the conservative’s “all lives matter” response.
Their conservative, warped, reductive cherry picking obviously worked with you since that is what you are focusing on, missing the point of my writing the article in the first place, which I admit is annoying.
Now I see why there has been so little coverage of HB7 in the media. Perhaps it is better to not draw attention to these twisted conservative ads.
Personally I, and I’m sure many others, would like to see our public schools provide our children with an excellent education and a SAFE place to study. I’m tired of this incessant political squabbling and being pushed this way and that by politicians who in many cases could care less about any of us. Start with the basics and stop making our schools a political battleground. At least until you can actually stop them from having to go through “active shooter” drills.
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/28/americans-complex-views-on-gender-identity-and-transgender-issues/
this was a long article that i only skimmed. is the Citizen coming out for HRT for kids under 18 without parental consent or is that a misreading of mine?
It could be a misreading.
I do not represent the Citizen as a whole. My opinions and analysis are my own. Like Substack, each of us writing for the Citizen are our own editors. There is no editorial staff shaping each article.
I wrote the article hoping I could in some way mitigate the twisted, reductive political ad put out by local conservatives. It appears I have not been successful, since your comment summarizes the framing of the issues found in the ad.
I am in favor of experts and patients having the right to privately decide on whether to have an abortion or gender-affirming care, which is what HB7 protects.
Thank you, Kathleen for keeping Sierra County alerted for what is going on. I may no longer live in Sierra County, I think it is very important to know what is happening. I am an advocate for these important issues. I now live in Colorado but New Mexico was a part of my life for almost 40 years.