I find Ohio Governor Mike DeWine a politically interesting character. On one hand, as a Republican, he seems like a reasonable, level-headed Governor. On the other hand, he sometimes appears to lean Democrat. When he leans left, he doesn't seem to recognize the threat that exists to the people of his state, and the country, from the radical, cultural-Marxist, left agenda. His latest head scratching decision fits that last category. Governor DeWine has vetoed a bill that would have restricted gender-affirming care for minors and restricted transgender girls’ participation in women's sports. This is a solid, unifying, right wing, Republican policy, so why would a Republican Governor veto it? The Wall Street Journal report below provides appropriate context.

• Ohio’s House Bill 68 would prohibit physicians from prescribing hormone treatments or puberty blockers to minors seeking to transition. It would also restrict them from performing gender-reassignment surgeries on minors.
• The legislation would allow minors already receiving treatments such as puberty blockers to continue to do so.
• Gov. DeWine says :
  • “This bill would impact a very small number of Ohio’s children".
  • ".... for those children who face gender dysphoria and for their families, the consequences of this bill cannot be more profound..."
  • “Ultimately, I believe this is about protecting human life.”
  • Approving such legislation, ..."would suggest the state holds more authority to determine what is medically best for a child than the parents."

These seem to be level-headed points, especially the one about parental control. Conservatives want, even require, parents to make such decisions for their minor children, the same way they make other important decisions.  If a parent wants to affirm such care, conservatives might think that decision is misguided and harmful, but the parent still has the right to do so.  It can still be argued that a parent cannot purposely do harm to their children without facing societal consequences.  Sexual abuse, mental abuse, physical abuse, providing treatments (medical or otherwise) that deform a child or stunt growth, etc., are frowned upon by society and potential consequences exist.  These transgender treatments should not be exempt from such considerations.  However, doctors should not be restricted, if they chose to participate, in performing such treatments that parents request for their children. The WSJ reports that lawmakers behind the bills have said the treatments can be harmful and minors are unable to make life-altering decisions early in their lives. This is a solid point when considering the fact that culture warriors are trying to have children consider and decide on such radical and dramatic procedures WITHOUT parental consent. See the California law making it a crime for parents who don't affirm a child's transgender decision. The WSJ reports that Democrat supporters of such treatments say restricting gender-related therapies for children is dangerous and is part of a broad effort to marginalize members of the LGBTQ community. That is a false political narrative. Further, Republicans hold a supermajority in both chambers of the state Legislature, making it possible for them to override DeWine’s veto. A couple of summary points:

• Political narratives will abound. The left wing media and Democrat politicians will loudly support this decision as a rare progressive move by a Republican Governor and attempt to use it as an example of how wrong the rest of the conservative Republican politicians are on this subject.  The right wing media will asale this decision as misguided and dangerous. Both are to be considered political posturing and political narratives like those mentioned above should be ignored.
• Is this veto an easy political decision for DeWine, given the legislature can override his veto? Possibly, but it appears more to be consistent thinking for the governor.
• Can a better bill be written? Yes, I think so.  One that requires parental consent.  One that requires mental health consultation for parents and children considering such treatment.  This would be to give them the best medical advice and counsel and not limit them to just  school officials and those who promote such a political agenda.  One that requires doctors who perform such treatment to get a certification from the state that assures qualified medical practice and just not political preferences.
• Remember, the Marxist left wants the state to be in control of our children, not parents.  They consider children an asset of the state. Children are not state property.  Every effort should be taken to eliminate any such inroads into our law.  This bill, as written, could provide such an inroad.
• What about transgender males participating in women's sports? This is easy, the answer is no.  Doing so reveals a lack of respect for women and for fair competition among women in sports. Such restrictions should remain in any bill. Biological (science) birth gender should apply.
• Will the Ohio legislature override the veto?  I don't think so.  I think they should consult with the Governor to present a new bill he can accept.  If that is not possible, then they will override his veto.

Overall, I think Governor DeWine is correct in his desire for a better bill on this issue for the people of Ohio (and maybe a template for other states as well). More From The Wall Street Journal (subscription required):