Democrats Rebel Against ‘Biological’ Language in Women’s Museum Bill

Politics16 Views

SouthernWorldwide.com – House Democrats staged a unified revolt against legislation on Thursday that proposed the construction of a new women’s history museum on the National Mall.

The Democrats’ aim was to block the bill after Republicans stipulated that the institution would be dedicated to biological women, explicitly excluding transgender individuals.

The measure ultimately failed to pass, with a vote of 204-216. A small group of conservative Republican lawmakers joined the Democrats in voting against the legislation, which aimed to designate a site for the forthcoming Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum on the National Mall grounds.

“American women are already proudly honored across the Smithsonian—from pioneers and patriots to scientists and leaders,” a source stated. “We don’t need another taxpayer-funded museum that risks becoming a shrine to abortion activists like Margaret Sanger or the latest progressive cause.”

It remains unclear whether Republican leadership will attempt to bring the legislation back for a vote at a later date. Eight Republican representatives did not cast a vote on the bill.

Read more : SpaceX Halts Latest Starship Rocket Test Flight

The widespread opposition from Democrats followed a statement issued by the Democratic Women’s Caucus last month. The caucus accused Republicans of targeting “transgender women and girls” through an amendment that defined the museum based on biological women.

The female lawmakers argued that the anticipated museum was long overdue but stated they could not support the legislation with the added language defining it around biological women, which many described as a “poison pill.”

“The Museum shall be dedicated to preserving, researching, and presenting the history, achievements and lived experiences of biological women in the United States,” the amended measure, introduced by Rep. Mary Miller, R-Ill., reads in part.

The bill further specifies that the museum may not depict “any biological male as female.” This provision codifies language from a 2025 executive order issued by the Trump administration, which prohibited the inclusion of transgender individuals in the museum.

“The addition of the word biological made them all run for the hills,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., commented during a news conference on Wednesday. “If that’s controversial in the Democratic Party, we’re in serious trouble. The party that purports to support women, demanding that the museum include biological men.”

The Democrats’ decision to withdraw support for the museum legislation occurs as the party continues to advocate for transgender rights, despite questions about whether these views impacted their performance in the 2024 election. Many Democrats are also facing continued scrutiny from Republicans regarding their definition of “woman.”

Democratic lawmakers also voiced strong criticism of amended language within the bill that granted the president the authority to select an “alternative site” within 180 days of the measure’s enactment.

“They amended the bill to give Trump and his allies unregulated power over what content and which women can be included in the museum, and the museum’s location,” Democratic Women’s Caucus Chairwoman Teresa Leger Fernandez, D-N.M., stated earlier this week in a joint statement with other female Democratic lawmakers. “A museum about women, fought for and supported by women, should not be controlled by one man.”

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., the sponsor of the museum measure, accused Democrats of using this rationale as a pretext to avoid addressing the transgender provision.

“They’re going to have to explain to their voters why they believe this museum should not be built and why they believe that there should be transgender exhibits in it,” she added.

Congress had previously authorized the women’s history museum in 2020, alongside a museum dedicated to American Latinos. Some Democrats justified their opposition to the current measure by objecting to the women’s history museum advancing without the planned Latino institution.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *