Proposition 135: Prohibit Certain Surgeries on Minors

Colorado · initiated statute · on the November 3, 2026 ballot. The ballot wording and the arguments for and against from the state’s official voter guide, in the state’s own words, each read the same way for rhetorical techniques. We don’t recommend a vote.

On the ballot

no rhetorical technique found

Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes modifying existing law by prohibiting surgery on a minor for the purpose of altering the minor’s biological sex characteristics, and, in connection therewith, prohibiting any health-care professional or other person from knowingly performing, prescribing, administering, or providing any surgery to a minor for the purpose of altering the minor’s biological sex characteristics and prohibiting the use of state or federal funds, Medicaid reimbursement, or insurance coverage to pay for this type of surgery?

From coloradosos.gov. Checked 2026-10-20. Confirm with your official ballot (sample-ballot lookup).

Argument for

By Colorado Legislative Council Staff (State Ballot Information Booklet)

no rhetorical technique found

1) Minors lack the maturity to make permanent, life-altering medical decisions. Like many other age-restricted rights and activities, gender-affirming surgeries should require a heightened level of maturity and the ability to make fully informed decisions. Until an individual is a legal adult, less invasive, non-surgical methods of providing gender-related care should be used.

This ensures that the most permanent interventions are reserved for when a person is able to fully understand the risks and benefits of surgery as an adult.

2) More long-term data is needed to determine whether gender-affirming surgery is a necessary treatment option prior to adulthood. Some minors may regret undergoing irreversible gender-affirming surgical procedures. Surgeries have risks, and surgery on minors should only be contemplated if there are no other viable treatment options.

Other states have limited gender-related treatment options available to minors, including surgical care.

From content.leg.colorado.gov, the official voter guide.

Argument against

By Colorado Legislative Council Staff (State Ballot Information Booklet)

no rhetorical technique found

1) The measure creates an overly broad ban on gender- and sex-based surgeries that interferes with needed care for both transgender and non-transgender minors. In addition to banning gender-affirming surgeries, the narrow exceptions under the measure could limit the ability of any youths to have surgeries for a range of reasons, both medical and cosmetic.

The measure’s ban is based on a minor’s purpose in seeking treatment, which could lead to uncertainty for patients, physicians, and insurers. Insurers may use this ban to limit their coverage for a wide variety of treatments, and medical professionals may reduce the care they are willing to provide for fear of legal repercussions.

2) The measure delays medically recommended care, even when parents, patients, and medical providers all agree the care is necessary. Medical care decisions for minors should be individualized based on a patient’s unique needs and well-established standards of care.

Transgender youth already face stigmatization, harassment, and discrimination, and restricting gender-affirming surgical care may worsen mental health outcomes for minors, including anxiety, depression, social isolation, eating disorders, and risk for self-harm and suicide.

Important medical decisions should be left to patients, families, and health care providers, not legislated at the ballot box.

From content.leg.colorado.gov, the official voter guide.

Who’s behind it

Party positions: Colorado Democratic Party: No · Colorado Republican Party: No position published · Libertarian Party of Colorado: Yes · Colorado Forward Party: No position

Committees registered to support or oppose Proposition 135, and what they reported to Colorado Secretary of State TRACER (tracer.sos.colorado.gov). Checked 2026-10-20.

Before comparing the sides: each committee’s figures come from its own latest report, so they can cover different dates. Some committees work on more than one measure or other campaigns, and their totals include all of it. A side with no registered committee can still have supporters. How much a side raised says nothing about whether the measure is a good idea.

Supporting

PROTECT KIDS COLORADO - ISSUE COMMITTEE

Ballot measure committee, sponsored by Protect Kids Colorado (from the registered committee name)

“Protect Kids Colorado is a broad coalition of parents, grandparents and concerned citizens coming together to protect kids and strengthen families in Colorado.” — its website

Raised $171,635 · spent $163,367 · as reported through Oct 14, 2026

Largest contributors as filed:

PROTECT KIDS COLORADO, 501(C)4 · $192,000
501(c)(4) nonprofit
COORS, JEFF · $25,000 · individual
own contributions since Jan 1, 2020, federal (FEC): $0 to Democratic and $347,870 to Republican candidates and party committees; Colorado state (TRACER): $0 to Democratic and $14,860 to Republican candidates and party committees; $2,500 to candidates for nonpartisan offices
PIKES PEAK CITIZENS FOR LIFE · $15,000
501(c)(4) nonprofit
TRUTH AND LIBERTY FOUNDATION · $10,000
501(c)(4) nonprofit
FAMILY POLICY ALLIANCE FOUNDATION · $10,000
501(c)(3) nonprofit

This committee is registered for more than one measure; these are its whole totals, which its filings don’t divide by measure.

PROTECT OUR CHILDREN

Ballot measure committee

Raised $0 · spent $0 · as reported through Sep 30, 2026

This committee is registered for more than one measure; these are its whole totals, which its filings don’t divide by measure.

Opposing

FAMILIES NOT POLITICS

Ballot measure committee

Raised $2,860,198 · spent $2,009,617 · as reported through Oct 14, 2026

Largest contributors as filed:

ROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD · $480,000
501(c)(3) nonprofit
ACLU OREGON · $300,000
501(c)(4) nonprofit
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, INC. · $299,867
501(c)(4) nonprofit
COBALT ADVOCATES · $279,000
501(c)(4) nonprofit · federal PAC contributions, 2025–26: $2,000 to Democratic and $0 to Republican candidates and party committees (FEC)
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC. · $250,000
501(c)(3) nonprofit

This committee is registered for more than one measure; these are its whole totals, which its filings don’t divide by measure.

NO ON 134 AND 135

Ballot measure committee

Raised $12,513 · spent $7,288 · as reported through Oct 14, 2026

Largest contributors as filed:

DENVER DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS OF AMERICA · $5,000
Other
CABRERA, FERNANDA · $500 · individual
MOORE, LAUREN · $482 · individual
LEHNHOFF, AERAN · $408 · individual
D3 ARTS · $370
501(c)(3) nonprofit

This committee is registered for more than one measure; these are its whole totals, which its filings don’t divide by measure.

PROTECT TRANS KIDS

Ballot measure committee

Registered; no financial report filed yet.

THE PEOPLE'S NO

Ballot measure committee

“The people directly affected by public policy should always be at the center when these policies are proposed.” — its website

Raised $300,000 · spent $300,000 · as reported through Oct 14, 2026

Largest contributors as filed:

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF COLORADO · $247,752
501(c)(4) nonprofit
COLOR ACTION FUND · $104,317
501(c)(4) nonprofit
COLORADO CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM COALITION (CCJRC) · $1,900
501(c)(3) nonprofit

This committee is registered for more than one measure; these are its whole totals, which its filings don’t divide by measure.

VOTE COMMON SENSE

Ballot measure committee

Raised $809,840 · spent $130,112 · as reported through Oct 14, 2026

Largest contributors as filed:

GREEN ADVOCACY PROJECT · $200,000
501(c)(4) nonprofit
COLORADO FUND FOR CHILDREN & PUBLIC EDUCATION · $115,000
Other · Colorado state contributions since Jan 1, 2025: $4,500 to Democratic and $0 to Republican candidates and party committees; $16,059 to candidates for nonpartisan offices (TRACER)
CHAMBERS, MERLE · $100,000 · individual
own contributions since Jan 1, 2020, federal (FEC): $4,614,737 to Democratic and $0 to Republican candidates and party committees, $24,106 to others; Colorado state (TRACER): $101,150 to Democratic and $0 to Republican candidates and party committees; $1,900 to candidates for nonpartisan offices
CONSERVATION COLORADO · $65,000
501(c)(4) nonprofit · Colorado state contributions since Jan 1, 2025: $750 to Democratic and $0 to Republican candidates and party committees (TRACER)
COBALT ADVOCATES · $65,000
501(c)(4) nonprofit · federal PAC contributions, 2025–26: $2,000 to Democratic and $0 to Republican candidates and party committees (FEC)

This committee is registered for more than one measure; these are its whole totals, which its filings don’t divide by measure.

PEOPLE FOR A FAIR COLORADO

Ballot measure committee

Registered; no financial report filed yet.

MAKE GOOD CHANGE

Ballot measure committee

“The People's Ballot is an unofficial voter guide to the 14 statewide ballot measures on Colorado's Nov. 3, 2026 general election ballot.” — its website

Registered; no financial report filed yet.

A rhetorical technique is about wording, not about whether a measure is a good idea or an argument is true. Ballot wording is written under each state’s own rules, and official arguments by the people the state names. All Colorado measures →