HB3406, titled the “Readiness Over Wokeness Act,” would bar individuals from serving in the Armed Forces if they have a current diagnosis or history of gender dysphoria, exhibit symptoms consistent with gender dysphoria, or have a history of gender-affirming care such as cross-sex hormone therapy or sex reassignment/genital reconstruction surgery. The bill directs the Secretary concerned to administratively discharge any service member who falls within that prohibition.
The measure also provides that separated service members would not have to reimburse educational or other benefits solely because of the separation, and would not be required to complete any remaining service obligation if no other basis for separation exists. In addition, the Secretary of Defense would have to reinvestigate or revoke security-clearance eligibility for certain separated individuals who previously had access to classified information.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would amend chapter 49 of title 10 of the U.S. Code by adding a new section 975, creating a categorical statutory bar on military service for people with gender dysphoria or a history of gender-affirming treatment. It would require administrative separation of affected personnel and alter how benefit recoupment and service obligations are handled for those discharged under this provision. It would also impose new Department of Defense duties regarding security-clearance reinvestigation and revocation for separated personnel who had access to classified information.
Sentiment
The bill appears to be strongly supported by its Republican sponsors and framed around military readiness, as reflected in its title and introduction by several conservative House members. No committee transcript or vote data is available, so there is no recorded broader debate in the provided materials. Based on the text and sponsorship, the bill’s tone is adversarial toward transgender service and aligned with a restrictive policy approach.
Contention
The central point of contention is the exclusion of individuals with gender dysphoria or a history of gender-affirming care from military service, which would directly affect transgender service members and applicants. Supporters are likely to argue the measure protects readiness, standards, and unit cohesion, while opponents would likely view it as discriminatory and harmful to qualified personnel. The security-clearance provisions and the mandatory discharge language may also raise concerns about privacy, due process, and the treatment of currently serving members.