From: Sent: To: Julianne Young 2/20/2020 6:34:47 AM "Kelsey Coalition" <kelseycoalition@gmail.com>, "Natasha Chart" <natasha.chart@gmail.com>, "Richard Mast" <RMast@lc.org>, "Steve Smith" <steve@stevesmithlaw.com>, "Fred Deutsch" <drfred@deutschclinic.com>, "Mary McAlister" <mmcalister@childparentrights.org>, "David Pickup" <davidpickuplmft@gmail.com>, "Eunie Smith" <alaeagle@charter.net>, "Gary McCaleb" <mccgsm@gmail.com>, "Glenn Ridder" <glenn.ridder@outlook.com>, "Horvath Hacsi" <birdcatcher9@yahoo.com>, "James Shupe (Formerly Jamie Shupe)" <jamie.shupe@yahoo.com>, "Michelle Cretella" <drmcretella@gmail.com>, "Michael Laidlaw" <mike@drlaidlaw.com>, "Jane Robbins" <rlrobb123@gmail.com>, "Lappert Patrick" <patrick@lappertplasticsurgery.com>, "MD Paul Hruz PhD" <hruz_p007@att.net>, "Margaret Clarke" <margaretclarke317@icloud.com>, "Matt Sharp" <msharp@adflegal.org>, "McHugh Paul" <pmchugh1@jhmi.edu>, "Monique Robles MD" <pamosa27@comcast.net>, "Quentin Van Meter" <kidendo@comcast.net>, "Roger Brooks" <rbrooks@adflegal.org>, "Timothy Millea MD" <TMillea@qcora.com>, "Vernadette Broyles" <vbroyles@childparentrights.org>, "Walt Heyer" <waltsbook@yahoo.com>, "William Malone" <malone.will@gmail.com>, "Scott, Greg" <Greg.Scott@heritage.org>, sjvick@senate.idaho.gov Cc: Subject: Re: Idaho Vital Statistics Integrity Act - short window for comments - by Friday, January 24 The Idaho Vital Statistics Act will be heard tomorrow morning in State Affairs. Our meetings are usually at 9 but I won't be surprised if we start at 8 AM. It will be available live online or recorded if any are interested in listening. We may get some ideas that will help as we head to the Senate. On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 2:59 PM Julianne Young <juliannehyoung@gmail.com> wrote: Does anyone have a contact in the research and statistics world or someone in the insurance industry (medical or car) that could provide a statement explaining the value of accurate information regarding biological sex as a qualifying characteristic for sex specific differences in policies, etc? These are research based private policies. When we fundamentally alter the legal definition of sex we undercut their ability to effectively implement those research-based policies. On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 6:05 PM Julianne Young <juliannehyoung@gmail.com> wrote: Hello all, I am adding Senator Steve Vick to this email group. He will be carrying the bill on the Senate side. We are on the agenda to print the bill in House State Affairs on Thursday and are working toward a full hearing a week from Wednesday. Welcome Senator Vick! We are glad to have you on board! Julianne Young On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 9:54 PM Julianne Young <juliannehyoung@gmail.com> wrote: And one last document-- This is an op-ed/ press statement if it passes muster: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Z8k-zehU6_j9JN-iHbG5-NV1LeQrlddM3Cryl_LXzFw/edit Feel free to comment on it and mark it up. On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 4:31 PM Julianne Young <juliannehyoung@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you all so much for your help and input. Here is an outline of talking points. Please weigh in and share cautions, resources, or additional ideas. Our full hearing will be a week from Wednesday. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FckQ5aKuniUTqJ8psNrWRRIYTNzn84uqLvQWRyj4FGI/edit On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 8:12 AM Julianne Young <juliannehyoung@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Friends, Attached below is the draft which we RS'd on Friday. The Lord is blessing our efforts! We anticipate a print hearing in House State Affairs this Wednesday and a full hearing towards the beginning of next week. I am working on talking points and a press release. We need to keep our messaging very controlled. Also, I would welcome input on plans for public testimony at the hearing. I am working on some drafts which I will post ASAP. Julianne Young On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 1:38 PM Julianne Young <juliannehyoung@gmail.com> wrote: Any last comments are invited. We'll RS at the end of the day. On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 2:27 PM Julianne Young <juliannehyoung@gmail.com> wrote: And one more small change from our attorney general in 39-245A (1) (iv) and (v). On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 9:56 AM Julianne Young <juliannehyoung@gmail.com> wrote: And with one more small change in (4) as recommended by ADF. On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 5:53 PM Julianne Young <juliannehyoung@gmail.com> wrote: I was able to visit with Matt Sharpe at ADF about my previous questions and have incorporated what I believe is a much improved strategy in section (5). I am sending this final draft [vital statistics draft(3) attached below] to you, to ADF , and to our folks here a vital statistics. Hopefully we are near or at our final draft so that we can work on securing support from the governor's office. Leadership appears to be supportive so I have good reason to hope we will soon have a hearing. Thank you again for your help! On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 12:19 PM Julianne Young <juliannehyoung@gmail.com> wrote: In regard to the last question: a colleague who is an attorney suggested that a better approach may be to stipulate that the physician make a presumptive determination of male or female and that after undergoing the appropriate combination of genetic analysis and evaluation of the individual's naturally occurring internal and external reproductive anatomy a signed affidavit from the parents and the physician may be submitted within 3 years or the presumptive determination may be challenged in a court as stipulated in (4). This eliminates the potential for an open-ended indeterminate status. Thoughts on this idea? On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 11:55 AM Julianne Young <juliannehyoung@gmail.com> wrote: My apologies if this is redundant. I have tried to 'reply all' in order to share this with the larger group but I'm not sure that it worked. If you could ensure that the larger group has access to this request I would appreciate it. Thanks so much. Our vital statistics folks in the Department of Health and Welfare have raised some questions which we have attempted to address in the attached draft. Their comments focused primarily on 39-245A (4) and (5). They wanted to ensure that the language stipulated that the affidavit be one provided by the department and asked that we make some changes in formatting to make the process more clear to the public. I believe the changes to (4) are straightforward. They raised some good questions regarding (5) though: 1- Our current language does not require verification from a medical professional that the appropriate chromosomal analysis and evaluation of anatomy has taken place and that the decision of sex is appropriate based on that analysis and evaluation. 2- Our language is silent about what happens if they don't resolve the indeterminate status within the three years. Do we need to specify that it can be resoled in court after this? Do we need to specify any requirements should that be the case? The drafter and I took a stab at it in the attached draft. those who are providing review on this! Again, feedback is appreciated. Thank you to Representative Young On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 11:06 AM Julianne Young <juliannehyoung@gmail.com> wrote: Did you receive the email I attempted to add as 'reply to all' with the questions raised by our Department of Health and Welfare vital statistics folks? On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 10:41 AM Richard Mast <RMast@lc.org> wrote: The comment was re SEGM language; I second the motion to stay away from “separate but equal.” “Differential treatment” is fine. Richard L. Mast, Esq.* Senior Litigation Counsel Liberty Counsel PO Box 540774 Orlando, FL 32854 (407) 875-1776 phone (407) 875-0770 fax LC.org Offices in DC, FL, and VA *Licensed in Virginia