Circumcision funding killed
A COMBINATION of fiscal conservatives, health professionals,
and “intactivists” (people who oppose circumcision of newborn males for a
variety of reasons) convinced the Colorado House Appropriations Committee last
week to kill a bill that would have restored state Medicaid funding for
circumcisions.
The bill failed in the committee on May 4 by a vote of eight to four, putting an end to the move to restore funding for this year’s legislative session, which ended Wednesday, May 9, and likely for the foreseeable future, since its co-sponsor, ?Senator Joyce Foster (D-Denver), is now retired from the State Legislature.
In earlier committee hearings this session, including the Senate Health and Human Services Committee in February and the House Health and Environment Committee last week – and in the overall Senate debate – proponents and opponents of the bill clashed over a wide range of issues related to the state helping pay for newborn circumcision procedures.
Opponents disputed much of that testimony, while so-called intactivists argued that circumcision actually increases risks of certain infections and diminishes sexual sensitivity among adult males.
Read Chris Leppek's previous coverage "Colorado debates circumcision"
They also often argued their own social justice position, pointing out that newborn infants have no say in whether they are circumcised or not.
Adding to the oppositional chorus were those who oppose state funding for such elective procedures as circumcision, although proponents argued that the annual cost to the state – estimated at $186,500, based on 2010 figures – was not only comparatively minimal but currently available.
FOSTER, a former Denver city councilwoman and wife of retired senior rabbi of Temple Emanuel Rabbi Steven Foster, told the Intermountain Jewish News this week that the bill failed primarily because the intactivist movement was able to convince legislators of their side of the argument, while she carried virtually the entire burden of arguing the pro-circumcision side.
“I never had any lobbying effort,” she said. “It was just me the whole time. I tried to get the Jewish Community Relations Council to work on it, but the JCRC did not have a majority vote on this issue. It was just so impossible. I can’t be in two chambers at one time.”
Foster tried to debate the bill primarily on social justice and health grounds and leave religious freedom out of it, even though many Jews and Muslims, and even some Christians, view circumcision as a religious obligation.
She was disappointed, Foster told the IJN, that the Jewish community did not seem willing to engage in the legislative debate on circumcision.
“When they decided to remove funding for circumcision last year, I spent a whole year working on this. Now it’s going to be up to our community, the Jewish community.”
She added that she expects the now-encouraged intactivist movement to begin working to ban circumcision altogether throughout Colorado, similar to ultimately unsuccessful efforts to do the same thing in California.
That’s when the issue will almost surely be argued on grounds of religious freedom and Foster says the Jewish community will have little choice but to get involved.
Foster warned the Jewish community that the anti-circumcision movement is not likely to go away anytime soon.
“I think that’s the direction the country is going. When you have 17 states that deny Medicaid for circumcision, that’s the direction, absolutely. I think that people just aren’t paying attention.”
In the aftermath of redistricting, Foster chose not to oppose fellow Democrat Sen. Pat Steadman in this year’s primary, thus putting an end to her own political career. She hopes that Steadman may pick up the effort to restore state funding for circumcision.
“He’s a good person and I’m hoping that he will carry the torch for issues that are important to the district,” Foster says. “I’ve done the best I could with it.
The bill failed in the committee on May 4 by a vote of eight to four, putting an end to the move to restore funding for this year’s legislative session, which ended Wednesday, May 9, and likely for the foreseeable future, since its co-sponsor, ?Senator Joyce Foster (D-Denver), is now retired from the State Legislature.
In earlier committee hearings this session, including the Senate Health and Human Services Committee in February and the House Health and Environment Committee last week – and in the overall Senate debate – proponents and opponents of the bill clashed over a wide range of issues related to the state helping pay for newborn circumcision procedures.
Opponents disputed much of that testimony, while so-called intactivists argued that circumcision actually increases risks of certain infections and diminishes sexual sensitivity among adult males.
Read Chris Leppek's previous coverage "Colorado debates circumcision"
They also often argued their own social justice position, pointing out that newborn infants have no say in whether they are circumcised or not.
Adding to the oppositional chorus were those who oppose state funding for such elective procedures as circumcision, although proponents argued that the annual cost to the state – estimated at $186,500, based on 2010 figures – was not only comparatively minimal but currently available.
FOSTER, a former Denver city councilwoman and wife of retired senior rabbi of Temple Emanuel Rabbi Steven Foster, told the Intermountain Jewish News this week that the bill failed primarily because the intactivist movement was able to convince legislators of their side of the argument, while she carried virtually the entire burden of arguing the pro-circumcision side.
“I never had any lobbying effort,” she said. “It was just me the whole time. I tried to get the Jewish Community Relations Council to work on it, but the JCRC did not have a majority vote on this issue. It was just so impossible. I can’t be in two chambers at one time.”
Foster tried to debate the bill primarily on social justice and health grounds and leave religious freedom out of it, even though many Jews and Muslims, and even some Christians, view circumcision as a religious obligation.
She was disappointed, Foster told the IJN, that the Jewish community did not seem willing to engage in the legislative debate on circumcision.
“When they decided to remove funding for circumcision last year, I spent a whole year working on this. Now it’s going to be up to our community, the Jewish community.”
She added that she expects the now-encouraged intactivist movement to begin working to ban circumcision altogether throughout Colorado, similar to ultimately unsuccessful efforts to do the same thing in California.
That’s when the issue will almost surely be argued on grounds of religious freedom and Foster says the Jewish community will have little choice but to get involved.
Foster warned the Jewish community that the anti-circumcision movement is not likely to go away anytime soon.
“I think that’s the direction the country is going. When you have 17 states that deny Medicaid for circumcision, that’s the direction, absolutely. I think that people just aren’t paying attention.”
In the aftermath of redistricting, Foster chose not to oppose fellow Democrat Sen. Pat Steadman in this year’s primary, thus putting an end to her own political career. She hopes that Steadman may pick up the effort to restore state funding for circumcision.
“He’s a good person and I’m hoping that he will carry the torch for issues that are important to the district,” Foster says. “I’ve done the best I could with it.
