By Alejandro Bermúdez | Guest Commentary, Rocky Mountain Voice
As national LGBT activists prepare a decade-long campaign to reshape public opinion on transgender issues, Colorado voters will face two major questions this November: whether biological males should compete in female sports and whether minors should undergo transgender-related surgeries.
According to The Washington Times, members of the Democratic National Committee’s LGBTQ caucus recently acknowledged that Republicans are preparing to make transgender policies a major issue in the 2026 campaign, especially those involving children, medical interventions and women’s athletics. Rather than retreat, activists are pursuing a longer strategy modeled on the campaign that transformed public opinion on same-sex marriage.
Sam Alleman of the Human Rights Campaign said activists must keep “driving narrative work,” betting that greater personal exposure to transgender people will increase public sympathy over time. HRC is backing that strategy with its $15 million “Let’s Get Free” electoral program.
Yet polling suggests activists are pushing against public opinion. A Pew Research Center study released August 11 found that 73% of Americans were uncomfortable with transgender athletes competing on teams that do not correspond to their sex at birth, while 66% favored requiring athletes to compete according to birth sex.
That makes Colorado an important test case.
Colorado lawmakers have spent years moving aggressively in the opposite direction. State law now extends gender-identity protections across schools, health care, identification documents, public facilities and anti-discrimination policy.
HB24-1039 requires school personnel to use a student’s “chosen name” and treats intentional refusal as discriminatory. In 2025, Gov. Jared Polis signed the “Kelly Loving Act,” which expanded protections for chosen names and gender expression and made it easier to alter sex designations on state documents.
Colorado has also codified insurance coverage for “gender-affirming care,” included such care under Medicaid, and created legal protections for providers against certain out-of-state or federal investigations. Beginning July 1, 2026, courts also generally suppress public records connected to a minor’s legal name change.
Against this backdrop, two citizen initiatives have qualified for the November 3 ballot.
Initiative #109, “Male and Female Participation in School Sports,” would require school athletic programs to designate teams as male, female or coeducational and generally limit participation according to biological sex. A female athlete could compete on a male team if no female team is available.
The proposal would bar biologically male students who identify as female from competing on female teams. It would apply to public, charter, private and denominational schools, as well as covered colleges and universities. Its legal position was strengthened by the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 30 decision upholding similar laws in Idaho and West Virginia.
Initiative #110, “Prohibit Certain Surgeries on Minors,” is narrower than a general ban on transgender medicine. It would prohibit health professionals from performing surgeries on minors for the purpose of altering biological sex characteristics and would bar public funds, Medicaid reimbursements and insurance coverage from paying for those surgeries. It includes an exception for medically verifiable disorders or differences of sex development.
The health-care debate is also colliding with new federal policy. The Trump administration has finalized a rule ending federal Medicaid and CHIP funding for puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and gender-transition surgeries for minors. The rule is scheduled to take effect October 13, though court challenges are expected.
Colorado therefore stands at the center of a larger national dispute.
The political Left appears to understand that it is losing ground with many voters on questions involving children and sex-based athletics. Its answer is not retreat, but a long campaign of organizing, spending and cultural persuasion.
On November 3, Coloradans will decide whether their state’s rapid movement toward gender-identity-based policy reflects the convictions of the electorate—or whether lawmakers have moved further and faster than voters are willing to follow.
Alejandro Bermúdez is a veteran journalist with more than four decades of experience in international news, digital media, TV, and commentary. He was the founding executive director of Catholic News Agency and has written for major English-language publications including The New York Times, the National Catholic Register, and Our Sunday Visitor. Born in Lima, Peru, and now based in Denver, Colorado, he writes on culture, politics, religion and the ethical implications of artificial intelligence.
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in commentary pieces are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management of the Rocky Mountain Voice, but even so we support the constitutional right of the author to express those opinions.