Here is the very latest on anti-DEI bill SB 17. I testified last Thursday against the state having a list of "DEI violators," which is good, but any person losing their job because of this will still have this on their record as they pursue other positions in Texas higher education institutions. Also, there is a lack of clarity regarding what happens whether one is tenured or un-tenured and a "DEI violator."
Most importantly, the legislature should really concern itself with the loss of revenue to higher education statewide should this bill become law. Federal granting agencies typically require DEI statements as integral to grant applications—and without which, is a basis for rejection. How will higher education then be paid for from this forfeiting of revenue?
More on this in the coming days.
-Angela Valenzuela
EDUCATION
Texas Senate panel OKs ban on DEI
offices, hiring in public universities.
by Megan Menchaca | April 8, 2023
Austin American-Statesman
The Texas Senate Higher Education Subcommittee approved a bill early Friday
morning that would prohibit public colleges and universities from maintaining
diversity, equity and inclusion offices or requiring DEI statements.
Senate Bill 17 would also prohibit public higher education institutions from requiring
DEI training or hiring employees or contractors to perform the duties of a DEI office.
Universities also couldn’t “give preference on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity,
or national origin” for job applicants.
The bill would allow college students or employees to sue a university if they are
required to participate in any DEI training that is “designed or implemented in
reference to race, color, ethnicity, gender identity, or sexual orientation” unless the
training is approved by the school’s general counsel and the Texas attorney general.
More: Texas GOP lawmakers are targeting DEI in colleges. Here's why some
students are concerned.
After the subcommittee approved the bill in a 4-1 vote Friday, SB 17 will now head to
the full Senate Education Committee for consideration, where members can decide
whether to advance the bill to the full Senate for a vote. Sen. Brandon Creighton,
chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Higher Education, filed the bill, which is one of
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s legislative priorities this session.
“Texas is one of the most diverse states in the nation. We all benefit from our state’s
diversity, and our institutions of higher education should reflect that diversity. DEI
efforts do not achieve that goal,” Creighton, R-Conroe, said during the hearing.
“They’ve often worked against the true goal of diversity and equality, only furthering
divides and creating sometimes a chilling effect on open dialogue.”
Creighton’s bill defines DEI offices as any office that:
Influences hiring with respect to race, sex, color, or ethnicity — other than
through “color-blind and sex-neutral hiring.”
Promotes different treatment of people on the the basis of race, color or
ethnicity.
Promotes policies implemented with preference to race, color or ethnicity except
those required under current law.
Conducts trainings, programs or activities implemented in reference to race,
color, ethnicity, gender identity or sexual orientation except those required
under current law.
'DEI programs inspire' students
Nearly everyone who testified on the bill, including Texas university students, faculty
members and other higher education advocates, urged lawmakers for hours to reject
the bill. Only one non-invited speaker testified in favor of the bill. Some Texans
waited 14 hours or more at the Capitol on Thursday to testify for two minutes, with
some testifying after midnight into Friday morning.
Corrine Floyd, president of the UT Senate, a student-led legislative organization, said
that as a student researcher in UT’s School of Human Ecology, she was deeply
concerned about the consequences of the bill and other “anti-DEI bills” on campus
research and her program’s ability to retain qualified faculty members and students.
“You will immediately lose these incredibly talented and qualified faculty and
students the moment we're unable to fund and protect them in their research,” said
Floyd, a UT junior. “We will not be able to maintain the (program’s) global No. 7
ranking and the quality of research we've seen thus far without faculty who
understand and employ DEI practices in their research, teaching and research
recruitment practices.”
UT law student Samuel Jefferson, the son of the first Black chief justice of the Texas
Supreme Court, said eliminating DEI programs will hurt state universities. He said
DEI helps with recruitment and directly benefits students by preparing them to
interact with diverse groups of people.
“DEI programs inspire and reassure students of all backgrounds that they are
capable of anything they set their minds to,” Jefferson said. “These programs are for
veterans, disabled students, first-generation Americans, foreign exchange students,
international students and socioeconomically disadvantaged students.”
More:Some Texas Republicans want to end tenure in public colleges,
'Firmly against the DEI agenda'
The subcommittee invited four DEI critics to testify, including Ben Carson, the
former U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, who all spoke in favor of
SB 17. They characterized DEI efforts in colleges as "worthless" and "expensive"
programs that cause division among students.
Carson said colleges and universities are weaponizing DEI initiatives by empowering
“bloated webs of bureaucracy” to comply with the DEI agenda. He said the “DEI
virus” is having a chilling effect on free speech and open inquiry at universities.
“When we value diversity at the expense of merit, all aspects of society will suffer,”
Carson said. “Part of the reason I am so firmly against the DEI agenda is because I
grew up in a time when real racism did exist, and when inequality truly was
ingrained in our institutions, but because I saw this America firsthand, I could also
say that that America is gone.”
The subcommittee did not invite any university administrators or anyone who works
in a DEI office to testify. Sen. Phil King, R-Weatherford, said he was "very, very
disappointed" that leaders of Texas universities did not opt to testify during the
meeting or speak with him privately about the bill.
He said he hopes that university administrators will testify about how SB 17 will
affect their campus operations when the bill is considered in the future by the Senate
Education Committee.
Additional bill changes made
Before the testimony on SB 17 began Thursday, the committee approved a new
version of the bill, known as a committee substitute.
Under the initial version of the bill, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
— which oversees public universities — would have maintained a list of employees
who violated the prohibition on DEI offices and DEI statements. That list would have
been shared with other public universities, and those institutions would have been
limited from hiring people on the list.
However, the new version of the bill removed that provision. The bill instead
requires boards of regents or other university governing boards to adopt policies to
discipline an employee or contractor who violates the bill, which could include
termination.
Under the bill, public colleges and universities wouldn’t be able to spend state funds
until their governing boards submit a report to the Legislature and the THECB
certifying their compliance with the bill. University governing boards would also be
required to testify before a legislative committee about their compliance with the bill
in between each legislative session.
The bill also calls for the state auditor to audit each public college and university at
least once every four years to determine if they had spent state funds in violation of
the bill. If an institution is found to be in violation, it would be ineligible to receive
state funds the following fiscal year — except for state funds appropriated to pay debt
service on bonds.
The bill is one of several filed by Republican state lawmakers this session to end
various DEI initiatives or targeting other aspects of race and ethnicity at public
colleges.
More:Panel OKs ban on forcing college students to adopt beliefs on
No comments:
Post a Comment