Editorial: Trump’s ‘big, ugly brick’ will harm LGBTQs

When we caught up with queer Congressmember Emily Randall (D-Washington) at the Seattle Pride parade June 29, she was monitoring the U.S. Senate’s deliberations on President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill. Randall, Congress’ first out Latina member, noted she had voted against it in the House, and was prepared to do so again once it passed the Senate, which it did July 1.

“A big, ugly brick is what it is,” Randall told us in an interview after she finished riding in the Pride parade as a grand marshal. While she added that some of the “bad stuff” that was in the House version had been removed by senators in order to pass it in the upper chamber, there were still plenty of awful things in the bill, including deep cuts to Medicaid and food stamps. Randall did return to Washington, D.C. the day after Pride, and again voted with all of her Democratic House colleagues (and two Republicans) against the bill July 3. Unfortunately, enough GOP congressmembers prevailed to see the bill adopted on a final vote; Trump signed it into law July 4, just as he had planned.

Now that Trump’s bill is law, we can indeed expect LGBTQs to suffer harm due to the cuts, even as the wealthy see their tax cuts made permanent as the federal deficit explodes to more than $3.4 trillion over the next 10 years. The Williams Institute, an LGBTQ think tank housed at the UCLA School of Law, issued a release after the House’s final vote. It estimates that about 2 million LGBTQ adults rely on Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, SNAP, informally known as food stamps.

The Williams Institute noted that the new law reduces federal Medicaid spending and requires beneficiaries to show that they are working or in school for 80 hours per month to keep their health insurance. In perhaps one bit of good news, the institute stated that an earlier provision banning Medicaid from covering gender-affirming care was removed from the bill. But it stated that “LGBT adults are twice as likely as non-LGBT adults to have Medicaid as their primary source of health insurance. (13% versus 7%.)” And, “approximately 1.8 million LGBT adults rely on Medicaid as their primary source of health insurance.” This includes 2 million lesbian and bisexual women, 1 million LGBT adults living with a disability, 560,000 LGBT parents with children under 18 in their households, 390,000 cisgender gay and bisexual men, and 185,000 transgender Americans, according to the institute.

“Cuts to Medicaid funding will have a disproportionate impact on subpopulations of LGBT people ...,” the institute stated. These include 26% who rely on Medicaid and are living with low incomes, 19% who are raising children, 18% who have disabilities, 17% of cisgender lesbian and bisexual women, 16% of people of color, and 12% of transgender people.

The new work requirements in the law will also create further barriers to accessing Medicaid, the institute stated.

Regarding food, the new law shifts the costs for assistance to the states and tightens eligibility, as the institute noted. “Nearly 2.1 million LGBT adults rely on SNAP,” stated the release. This includes 3 million LGBT adults living with a disability, 3 million lesbian and bisexual women, 900,000 LGBT adults who have children under 18 in their household, 500,000 cisgender gay and bisexual men, and 250,000 transgender adults, according to the institute’s figures.

“These changes to federal programs will have a significant impact on LGBTQ people, especially vulnerable subpopulations such as lesbian and bisexual women, transgender individuals, and those living with disabilities, who are more likely to face poverty and food insecurity,” stated Brad Sears, distinguished senior scholar of public policy at the Williams Institute.

Many LGBTQs will also be adversely affected by changes to the federal student loan program. “Never before has Congress passed legislation that would take away benefits and relief from current student loan borrowers and college-bound families on such a massive scale,” reported Forbes. “Borrowers currently in repayment on their student loans or pursuing student loan forgiveness, as well as prospective students hoping to attend college or enroll in a graduate program, will now have fewer options to pay for school or manage their existing student debt.”

We certainly hope that states can adopt policies that will alleviate the worst of these cuts. Supporting local food banks would be a good first step, as they are on the frontlines and serve so many. California will be looking at ways to blunt the Medicaid cuts through existing programs. CalMatters reported that the Biden administration allowed the Golden State to have flexibility with its Medicaid spending under Medi-Cal (the state’s name for Medicaid); it’s unknown whether the Trump administration will allow that to continue. We certainly hope so, but aren’t holding our breath.

In the meantime, political leaders need to be informed by their constituents about the impacts these cuts are having once they go into effect. The LGBTQ community can do this by working with nonprofits affected by these cuts, and working to rally supporters. The more people who make their voices heard, the more candidates for next year’s midterms will need to pay attention. Trump has overreached on this tax and spending bill, and, as Randall said, there’s nothing beautiful about it.