New polling released by the group behind a Washington ballot initiative that would ban transgender girls from competing in girls’ school sports shows the measure has majority support ahead of the November election.
Initiative 638 will ask Washington voters whether students defined by the measure as “biologically male” should be prohibited from competing in certain K-12 athletic activities intended only for female students. The measure would also require a health care provider to verify a student’s biological sex before the student could participate in female-only athletics.
READ ALSO | Group wearing ‘XX-XY’ shirts kicked out of Portland Thorns match, sports bar
Let’s Go Washington, the group backing the initiative, released polling this week showing 56% of respondents would vote for I-638, 24% would vote against it and 22% were undecided.
Support varied by political affiliation. The results show 73% of Republicans, 48% of Democrats and 52% of independents surveyed said they would vote for the initiative.
The polling was conducted on behalf of the campaign supporting I-638 and is not independent.
Let’s Go Washington told KATU the poll surveyed 7,500 likely Washington voters and presented respondents with the ballot title. The group has not provided KATU with the full polling data or methodology, including the margin of error, so the results cannot be independently evaluated.
Hallie Herzberg, communications director for Let’s Go Washington, told KATU the campaign believes the results show the issue drawing support across party lines.
“We believe that people are standing with us,” said Herzberg. “We’ve been hearing that from kind of across the board that girls deserve to have their rights and their sports protected.”
What would Initiative 638 do?
The initiative would prohibit students it defines as biologically male from competing in athletic activities designated for female students. It would also require students participating in female-only athletics to provide a signed statement from a health care provider verifying their biological sex as part of the athletic physical process.
The measure defines biological sex based on a person’s sex at birth and says verification may be based on reproductive anatomy, genetic makeup or naturally occurring testosterone levels.
The measure would allow schools to offer coed athletic activities open to students regardless of sex.
Under current Washington Interscholastic Activities Association (WIAA) policy, students can participate in athletics consistent with their gender identity or the gender they most consistently express. School personnel responsible for student eligibility work with students to determine eligibility. Once eligibility is granted, it does not need to be renewed each sports season or school year.
The policy has been debated within the WIAA.
In April, WIAA representatives voted 29-24 in favor of an advisory proposal that would limit participation in girls’ sports to biological females. The WIAA said it would not implement the proposal because it conflicts with current Washington state law. If voters approve the measure, it would change the eligibility standard for female-only school sports.
Supporters and opponents debate fairness, privacy
Supporters of I-638 argue the measure is needed to preserve separate athletic opportunities for female students.
KATU asked Herzberg why a statewide change is necessary given questions about how many transgender athletes currently compete in Washington.
Herzberg said the campaign believes the number of athletes affected does not change the underlying issue.
“One girl losing her opportunity, one girl losing a podium space, one girl losing out on playing a sport that she loves is enough for us to take action and make sure that it doesn’t happen to other girls,” said Herzberg.
Herzberg also said the campaign does not believe the health care verification requirement would significantly change the sports physical process for most families. She said a provider could rely on existing medical information to verify a student’s sex.
Opponents argue the measure could create new privacy concerns for students.
Terah Ebie, president of Queer Community Network and the mother of a student-athlete in Southwest Washington, told KATU it is one of her primary concerns with I-638.
“As a parent, one of my biggest concerns is the invasion of my daughter’s privacy,” said Ebie.
Ebie argues the biological-sex verification requirement could result in greater scrutiny of girls’ bodies. The initiative itself does not specify that students must undergo a particular examination. It says health care providers must verify biological sex based on reproductive anatomy, genetic makeup or naturally produced testosterone levels.
Let’s Go Washington disputes the argument that I-638 would require invasive examinations. Herzberg told KATU the initiative does not require additional exams or testing beyond the existing sports physical process.
Ebie also acknowledged concerns about fairness in school sports but said she believes there are other ways to address them without I-638.
“If fairness is the real question, then there are many other ways to address the issue of fairness in sports than with exclusionary and invasive procedures that will subject all of our girls to the potential for increased harm,” said Ebie.
KATU also reached out to other groups conducting polling on I-638 to see whether they were finding similar results.
The Northwest Progressive Institute, which opposes the initiative, told KATU it has commissioned extensive polling on the measure but has not released its findings. The organization declined to share any results with KATU.
Washington voters will decide Initiative 638 in the November general election.
Source: katu.com
