Democrats pointed out that such a broad and vague definition of DEI could outlaw important work on issues like racial health disparities and wealth inequality. It could even ban local governments from honoring Black History Month or Women’s History Month.“I think employers and students and workers, folks across the state would agree that fairness and […]
Democrats pointed out that such a broad and vague definition of DEI could outlaw important work on issues like racial health disparities and wealth inequality. It could even ban local governments from honoring Black History Month or Women’s History Month.“I think employers and students and workers, folks across the state would agree that fairness and diversity are not at odds with each other,” said Rep. Vernetta Alston, D-Durham. “I think this bill suggests otherwise. I think the logic of it is misguided.”“This bill is a direct attack on the principles of fairness and equal opportunity,” said NC NAACP President Deborah Maxwell. “Banning DEI programs and restricting public funds from supporting them is an attempt to erase the progress made in addressing systemic discrimination.”“We know the importance. It’s common sense. It’s good for business. It’s good for North Carolina,” Lofton said. “But unfortunately, now we’re bringing Washington politics into our state and unfortunately I don’t think it’s very well thought through.”Jones doesn’t see that as a problem. He said he wants to get rid of anything that groups people into categories.The bill passed the committee with all Republicans supporting and all Democrats opposed.Some state lawmakers want to go beyond just banning diversity, equity and inclusion programs in state and local government.“DEI has failed. It has wasted taxpayer dollars, lowered standards and eroded the trust in our institutions,” said the bill’s sponsor, state House Republican majority leader Brenden Jones, R-Columbus.Many municipalities and counties in the Triangle area have DEI programs or initiatives, including Raleigh, Cary, Durham, Chapel Hill and Carrboro. They would be required to shutter those programs by December.A bill that passed the House Judiciary Committee Tuesday would make it a criminal offense to use public funds to give special treatment to any group.Critics say House Bill 171 could shut down critical discussions about discrimination and civil rights. The state NAACP is vowing to fight it, calling it “an attempt to rewrite history.”The state NAACP said it will fight the legislation.Rep Brandon Lofton, D-Mecklenburg, noted that in 2023, Republican lawmakers formed a committee to promote women in science, technology, engineering and math jobs. HB 171 would make that committee’s work illegal.
“We’re trying to become one North Carolina, get away from this divisiveness that we keep talking about, that you keep talking about,” Jones said. “That’s what separates us. There’s more that brings us together.”“It’s overly broad and vague, and anytime you add a criminal penalty to something, you need to be crystal clear about what it means,” Lofton cautioned.“I can’t help, you can’t help, what was done in the past,” Jones told Harrison. “All we can do is lead the charge for the future. I look forward to continue doing that while serving.”“For too long, DEI programs have replaced qualifications with quotas, achievement with identity and excellence with activism,” Jones told the committee. “They do not expand opportunity. They create division.”Lofton said it’s possible that even private citizens and corporations could be covered by the bill’s ban on “non-government entities” applying for grant money that comes with DEI requirements.Rep. Pricey Harrison, D-Guilford, said some of the initiatives Jones objects to were created to address problems that originated because of past discrimination.Jones’s bill would make it a misdemeanor to use public money to promote DEI, which it defines as differential treatment of or special benefits for any group, or attempting to influence hiring practices. State and local government employees could also be sued for civil damages over claims of discriminatory DEI practices.
