DEI Didn’t Fail—Our Willingness to Tell the Truth Did, by Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

     DEI Didn’t Fail—Our Willingness to Tell the Truth Did

by

Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

December 21, 2025

This opinion was inspired by Bryan Stevenson in conversation with Katie Couric where Stevenson offered a diagnosis of why Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs have become such easy political targets. His answer was not that equity is misguided, but that the nation has never done the prerequisite work that equity demands: honest historical reckoning.

Stevenson’s insight is deceptively simple. DEI initiatives were layered onto institutions that never admitted wrongdoing. Without an explicit acknowledgment of harm—genocide, slavery, segregation, exclusion, and dispossession—equity efforts were framed as favors, preferences, or ideological impositions rather than as partial remedies for documented historical and ongoing injustice. When truth is absent, backlash thrives.

This is not merely a communications failure; it is a moral one. DEI faltered where institutions substituted optics for accountability—training sessions without truth-telling, statements without repair, representation without redistribution. In that vacuum, opponents easily recast equity as divisive rather than corrective.

Stevenson’s critique resonates powerfully in this moment of organized forgetting, when states move to ban honest teaching about race, gender, and sexuality and when “neutrality” is invoked to preserve inequality. His work—through the Equal Justice Initiative—has long shown that societies cannot heal what they refuse to name. Memory, he reminds us, is a precondition for justice.His analysis makes me think, in particular, about a recent blog on the many forms of oppression experienced by the Mexican American community whose histories have similarly been silenced.

When these histories remain unspoken, DEI appears unmoored—an abstract, detached moral appeal rather than a grounded response to concrete harms. That omission weakens equity work and reinforces the false idea that inclusion is a modern invention rather than a long-delayed obligation.

If DEI is to survive—and more importantly, to matter—it must be reframed not as a program but as a process of repair. That process begins with truth: naming who was harmed, how institutions benefited, and what accountability requires.

It also requires a broader historical lens—one capacious enough to include African American, Mexican American, Puerto Rican, Native American/Indigenous, Asian American, and other communities whose experiences have been systematically minimized or erased.

This is precisely why battles over curriculum matter—at the Texas State Board of Education, in local school board meetings, and in classrooms across the country. When history is narrowed, sanitized, or selectively told, equity initiatives are stripped of their context and recast as ideological overreach rather than as long-overdue responses to documented harm.

The lesson from Stevenson’s intervention is not that DEI failed. It is that we asked equity to do the work of history without allowing history to be told. Until institutions are willing to admit wrongdoing—and until our national narrative expands to include all the communities shaped by that wrongdoing—equity will remain vulnerable to distortion and attack.

Justice, as Stevenson teaches, is not achieved through silence. It is built through memory, courage, and the collective willingness to tell the truth—even when that truth unsettles the stories we have long told ourselves.

The Real Reason DEI Programs Failed According to Civil Rights Icon Bryan Stevenson

 
Next Question with Katie Couric. A clip from my longer interview with Bryan Stevenson, founder and executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative. In my full interview we talked about how the murder of George Floyd and the protests of 2020 sparked a nationwide movement for racial justice and reckoning. Just a few years later, many of those hard-won conversations are being rolled back.
Sign up here for daily email updates from me, Katie Couric, on the news that matters most to you: https://katiecouric.com/wake-up-call/...

Mexico's Wondrous Linguistic Diversity: Mexico and the U.S. should make May 21st a Federal Holiday that Celebrates Diversity

Friends,

Building off of yesterday's blog post, I mention again that Nahuatl itself is spoken by at least 1.6 million people in Mexico (Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía, 2020).

Let’s also celebrate, rather than punish, diversity. After all, diversity is not just a source of strength and creativity—it is a vital safeguard against the erosion of our shared humanity and our still-young democracy.​

Let’s celebrate—not punish—diversity. It’s not only a source of strength and creativity, but a crucial defense against threats to our shared humanity and still-young democracy.

In Texas, recent legislation has targeted DEI programs in public institutions. Governor Abbott has banned DEI offices in higher education and is pushing for similar bans in K–12, claiming they create division. These moves reflect a broader rollback of efforts to support our communities’ diverse backgrounds.

In contrast, Mexico embraces its cultural diversity, recognizing over 68 national languages and 364 language variants—one of the world’s most linguistically rich landscapes. Its commitment to preservation highlights how diversity can be a national asset.

For more on this, check out the 2024 article, "How Many Indigenous Languages are Spoken in Mexico?" Also, see a 2024 piece in Datahub Central Indigenous People In Mexico for more information.

On a related matter, UNESCO's World Day for Cultural Diversity for Dialogue and Development is coming up on May 21. Our nations, including the U.S. should make May 21st a federal holiday that celebrates diversity. Mexico could, as well. Why not? Órale, let's start a campaign on both sides of the border.

May all have a wonderful day and weekend!

-Angela Valenzuela

Gen Ztressed: A New Generation of College Students, by Alan Dennington, M.D., May 14, 2021

 Interesting read. Though not as scholarly as I would have preferred, what I am reading here tends to nevertheless align with what I've read about Generation Z (Gen Z). Dr. Dennington nevertheless provides a framework that gets at sources of stress and what can be done to help our college students and children, generally. They definitely differ from other age-generational cohorts like Baby Boomers, Gen X and Millennials.

Technology and their facility with it has its ups and downsides. This quote was telling:

The dominance of cell phones among teens affects every area of life for Gen Zers — from social interactions to mental health. They’re the first generation of lifelong internet. In fact, 98% of Gen Zers own a smartphone, which they check over 80 times a day.

Geez, they check their phones, on average, more than 80 times a day! I know that this frustrates their parents and other adults, yet this is the world we've built. This, of course, means that we need to intentionally address how they interact socially and their mental health issues. 

Personally, I like how Gen Z has normalized mental health issues such that it's not the taboo subject it used to be. I also like that they're so diverse and that they are open to this diversity. This is certainly an improvement from earlier generations—although helps explain the pushback against it by lawmakers that fear it.

-Angela Valenzuela

Gen Ztressed: A New Generation of College Students

Timely Care | ALAN DENNINGTON, M.D. | 
• MAY 14, 2021
 

Table of ContentsWhat makes Gen Z different than other generations?

1. The technology revolution

2. Highly educated

3. Diversity

4. A focus on mental health

Sources of stress for Gen Z
How has the pandemic affected a generation of students?
How higher education can support Gen ZMajors and careers
Academics
Finances
Self-identity
Student life
How can your campus improve supports for Gen Z students?

Born in 1995 and later, Gen Z includes 74 million young people — about 24% of the population. According to the latest APA Stress in America Survey, Gen Zers are 27% more likely to report their mental health as poor than other generations, compared to 15% of millennials and 13% of Gen Xers. That’s why Gen Z could have another name — Gen Ztressed. Given this reality, what can higher education do to help Gen Z college students thrive?

What makes Gen Z different than other generations?

Generation Z grew up with cell phones, had Instagram before starting high school, and don’t recall a time before the internet. And because Gen Zers make up one in four Americans, it’s important to understand that Gen Z represents a clear break from past demographics. It’s a diverse generation that grew up in an era with social issues like school shootings, the Great Recession, the Occupy movement, protests over police brutality, and the legalization of gay marriage.

1. The technology revolution

For Gen Z, the role of technology is central — they’ve never known the world without it. Boomers grew up as television was evolving, Gen X grew up as the computer revolution was developing, and Millennials grew up during the expansion of the internet. But Gen Z is the first generation of digital natives, coming of age with technological advances and mobile devices like the smartphone.

The dominance of cell phones among teens affects every area of life for Gen Zers — from social interactions to mental health. They’re the first generation of lifelong internet. In fact, 98% of Gen Zers own a smartphone, which they check over 80 times a day.

2. Highly educated

Generation Z students are on track to become the most educated generation. They have higher high school graduation rates and lower dropout rates than those who came before. In 2018, 57% of 18 to 21-year olds were in college, compared with 52% of Millennials, and 43% of Gen Xers at similar ages.

3. Diversity

Gen Zers are also the most diverse generation. Findings from The Pew Research Center show nearly half of 6 to 21-year-old Gen Zers are racial or ethnic minorities, compared with 39% of Millennials in that age bracket in 2002, and more than double the percentage of early Baby Boomers in 1968. One in four Gen Zers is Hispanic, significantly higher than the Hispanic share of Millennials in 2002. The percentage of Asians is up from 4% to 6%, while 14% are Black.

4. A focus on mental health

As for Gen Z’s well-being: they struggle with mental illness. Only 45% of Gen-Zers say their mental health is good, 11% lower than Millennials. A whopping 91% of Gen Z said they experienced physical or emotional symptoms due to stress and mental illness in the past year.

Sources of stress for Gen Z

When looking at data from APA Stress in America survey respondents, it’s not hard to see why stress and mental illness has increased:75% of Gen Zers said mass shootings are a significant source of stress.

Gen Zers are more stressed than adults about issues in the news, such as the separation and deportation of immigrant and migrant families (57% versus 45% of all adults) and sexual harassment and assault reports (53% versus 39%).

64% report money and work to be stressors. Personal debt (33%) and housing instability (31%) were significant sources of stress, while nearly 28% cite hunger or food insecurity.
62% reported that the political climate is a significant stressor, and more than two-thirds (69%) reported that the nation’s future causes them stress. Most Americans (61%) also disagreed about whether the country is on a path to being stronger than ever.

Twenty-four percent of adults identified discrimination as a significant source of stress — the highest percentage since 2015. Black adults (46%) and Hispanic adults (36%) reported discrimination as a significant source of stress, compared with 14% of White adults.
How has the pandemic affected a generation of students?

As of May 10, 2021, there have been 158,651,638 confirmed cases of COVID-19 across the globe, including 3,299,764 deaths. Having grown up in peacetime with advanced technologies, it’s no understatement that this catastrophe will define how Gen Z navigates the world as adults.

Recent reports confirm Gen Z’s psychological well-being and mental health have been negatively influenced by COVID-19. According to one report, over 60% of Gen Z is concerned about COVID-19 and almost half of them feel anxious or depressed. Difficulties relating to Gen Z’s psychological well-being were heightened when lockdown measures were imposed. And, the latest observations suggest that the mountains of COVID-19 information on social media overwhelmed users, having a detrimental influence on their well-being. While Gen Z grew up as digital natives, they also experience a higher-than-average level of information overload.

Another effect of COVID-19 on Gen Z is they are rethinking the value of a traditional four-year college education. For instance, matriculation in short-term credential classes over the last year increased by 70% to nearly 8 million over the same period last year. That increase came as freshman college enrollment dropped 16%.

An Associated Press study reported that 71% of Americans believe it’s beneficial for some students to attend a community college instead of a four-year institution, with a similar number agreeing that a community college education is an excellent choice. Given community colleges cost a third of what students pay at a four-year college, it’s no wonder Gen Zers are considering alternatives including apprenticeships, trade schools, and other specialized industry training.

How higher education can support Gen Z

As higher ed leaders reimagine programs and services to attract and support Gen Z students, they need to promote iterative change based on what works. It’s not an option to simply stay the course. Here are a few principles derived from The Chronicle of Higher Education that can help college administrators and educators as they consider expanding student supports for Gen Z students.

Majors and careers

Colleges must decide which programs to add, expand, scale back, or eliminate with limited resources. Focused on value, Gen Zers put great stock in their choice of major — the choices of today’s students are a departure from past generations. A shift toward practically-oriented majors has meant fewer students in the humanities, preferring health professions, computer science and engineering, biological science, and sports management, among other fields.

Academics

Knowledge is everywhere for Gen Z students. They’re accustomed to finding answers instantaneously on Google while doing homework or sitting at dinner. They seek constant information and entertainment in YouTube videos much as previous generations read magazines or watched TV. They are used to customization. And the instant communication of texting and status updates means they expect faster feedback from everyone, on everything.

Finances

Members of Generation Z don’t want expensive campus frills. They’re wary of taking on student loan debt and more willing to question the value of a degree and look for alternatives. Many remember their parents living through the recession, perhaps losing their jobs or homes. Despite the economic recovery of the past decade, financial security continues to weigh on their minds. They are interested in practical subjects with clear paths to successful careers.

Self-identity

Today’s students are attentive to inclusion across race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and gender identity, and they want colleges to live up to those ideals as well. At the same time, Gen Zers are less receptive to the principles of free speech, especially when that speech offends their values.

Student life

Gen Zers want fewer comforts and more supports during their college experience. For example, they may be fine with simpler housing in exchange for more flexible spaces that allow for increased interaction with classmates and professors. This next generation of students also needs support services like advising and counseling throughout the college journey. That means such services can’t be merely added on, but rather must be fully integrated into the student experience. Telehealth services are a great example of a complete care solution that meets the needs of a technology-driven generation. It eliminates wait times, reduces the stigma of seeking mental and medical care, and is available the moment a student needs care.

As campus leaders consider how to support Gen Z students at a time when the pool of high-school graduates is shrinking and expectations are increasing for student success, these insights can serve as touchpoints for how colleges can reach and serve this new generation of young adults.

How can your campus improve supports for Gen Z students?

TimelyCare partners with colleges and universities to expand access to care and improve student health for the better. Watch the panel discussion on Gen Ztressed: Student Mental Health in the New Now to learn how college and university leaders can lead the change on their campuses to support students who are wondering what comes next.

Hear from higher education experts from EVERFI, The Claremont Colleges, Healthy Minds Network, and The Jed Foundation (JED) on how to create a college campus environment that promotes mental well-being, and can help students navigate what they’re experiencing — the new now.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the Workplace: A majority of U.S. workers say focusing on DEI at work is a good thing, but relatively small shares place great importance on diversity in their own workplace

Friends,

As we consider the current politics surrounding DEI programs, there are many things to consider as there is often a big distance between saying one values workplace diversity and the task of actually carrying it out and managing it well. 

At the University of Texas where I work, managing it meant a well-conceived infrastructure that took decades to develop that existed to address the diverse needs of students with respect to gender, race, ethnicity, ability, socioeconomic status, veteran status, sexual orientation, undocumented immigrant, and first-generation college students. A focus on diversity at the college level prepares whites and non-whites, women and men and trans individuals alike for our highly diverse world, and potentially diverse working environments upon graduation.

In addition to this recent, excellent Pew Research analysis as reported by (Minkin, 2023), I'm providing you with other references so that you can see for yourselves the high value that Americans have for diversity, despite real differences in perception of it based on race, gender, and political party membership.

There are credible and powerful research studies dating back to 2015 by McKinsey and Associates (e.g., Hunt, Layton, & Prince, 2015) that show how diversity matters for positive work environments, more highly committed employees, and these same organizations' financial performance. 

I know that I have appreciated diversity at UT and fear that the elimination of DEI offices and initiatives will negatively impact so many of our students' sense of belonging and even alienate faculty who find this anti-diversity political agenda to be punishing and backward. 

Diversity is truly our strength as a country. And we're only becoming more diverse. It's reckless and destructive when incumbents pass harmful legislation because they're primarily concerned about maintaining themselves in power as opposed to what's good for society.

-Angela Valenzuela

#DEI #Diversity #DiversityMatters #Diversity in Education #DiverseSociety #UnityThroughDiversity #DiverseWorld #InclusionAndDiversity

References

Hunt, V., Layton, D. & Prince, S. (2015, Feb. 2). Diversity matters. McKinsey & Company (London). Link 

Irwin, L. (2024, Feb. 13). Most say diversity makes US stronger, but fewer support DEI training: Survey, The Hill. Link

Minkin, R. (2023, May 17). Diversity, equity and inclusion in the workplace: A majority of U.S. workers say focusing on DEI at work is a good thing, but relatively small shares place great importance on diversity in their own workplace, Pew Research. Link

Patrick, H. A., & Kumar, V. R. (2012). Managing Workplace Diversity: Issues and Challenges. Sage Open, 2(2). Link

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the Workplace

A majority of U.S. workers say focusing on DEI at work is a good thing, but relatively small shares place great importance on diversity in their own workplace

BYRACHEL MINKIN | Pew Research | May 17, 2023

Workplace diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, or DEI, are increasingly becoming part of national political debates. For a majority of employed U.S. adults (56%), focusing on increasing DEI at work is a good thing, according to a new Pew Research Center survey. But opinions about DEI vary considerably along demographic and political lines.

Most workers have some experience with DEI measures at their workplace. About six-in-ten (61%) say their company or organization has policies that ensure fairness in hiring, pay or promotions, and 52% say they have trainings or meetings on DEI at work. Smaller shares say their workplace has a staff member who promotes DEI (33%), that their workplace offers salary transparency (30%), and that it has affinity groups or employee resource groups based on a shared identity (26%). Majorities of those who have access to these measures say each has had a positive impact where they work.

Related: How Americans View Their Jobs

This nationally representative survey of 5,902 U.S. workers, including 4,744 who are not self-employed, was conducted Feb. 6-12, 2023, using the Center’s American Trends Panel.¹ The survey comes at a time when DEI efforts are facing some backlash and many major companies are laying off their DEI professionals.

Jump to:

• The value of DEI efforts at work
• The importance of a diverse workforce
• DEI measures and their impact
• How gender, race and ethnicity impact success in the workplace

Some key findings from the survey:

• Relatively small shares of workers place a lot of importance on diversity at their workplace. About three-in-ten say it is extremely or very important to them to work somewhere with a mix of employees of different races and ethnicities (32%) or ages (28%). Roughly a quarter say the same about having a workplace with about an equal mix of men and women (26%) and 18% say this about a mix of employees of different sexual orientations.
• More than half of workers (54%) say their company or organization pays about the right amount of attention to increasing DEI. Smaller shares say their company or organization pays too much (14%) or too little attention (15%), and 17% say they’re not sure. Black workers are more likely than those in other racial and ethnic groups to say their employer pays too little attention to increasing DEI. They’re also among the most likely to say focusing on DEI at work is a good thing (78% of Black workers say this), while White workers are the least likely to express this view (47%).
• Women are more likely than men to value DEI at work. About six-in-ten women (61%) say focusing on increasing DEI at work is a good thing, compared with half of men. And larger shares of women than men say it’s extremely or very important to them to work at a place that is diverse when it comes to gender, race and ethnicity, age, and sexual orientation.
• There are wide partisan differences in views of workplace DEI. Most Democratic and Democratic-leaning workers (78%) say focusing on DEI at work is a good thing, compared with 30% of Republicans and Republican leaners. Democrats are also far more likely than Republicans to value different aspects of diversity. And by wide margins, higher shares of Democrats than Republicans say the policies and resources related to DEI available at their workplace have had a positive impact.
• Half of workers say it’s extremely or very important to them to work somewhere that is accessible for people with physical disabilities. About three-in-ten workers (29%) say this is somewhat important to them, and 21% say it’s not too or not at all important. A majority of workers (76% among those who do not work fully remotely) say their workplace is at least somewhat accessible for people with physical disabilities.
• Many say being a man or being White is an advantage where they work. The survey asked respondents whether a person’s gender, race or ethnicity makes it easier or harder to be successful where they work. Shares ranging from 45% to 57% say these traits make it neither easier nor harder. But far more say being a man and being White makes it easier than say it makes it harder for someone to be successful. Conversely, by double-digit margins, more say being a woman, being Black or being Hispanic makes it harder than say it makes it easier to be successful where they work.

BBDP Teach In, featuring NAACP President Gary Bledsoe, Esq., Emilio Zamora, Ph.D., and Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D., Moderator

Colleagues:

I am happy to share with you this

full video of an April 4, 2023, presentation, featuring NAACP President Gary Bledsoe, Esq. and Emilio Zamora, Ph.D., and myself as moderator.

This Black Brown Dialogues on Policy (BBDP) Teach In took place with UT Austin Policy Analysis masters' and Ph.D. students sharing opinions on the 88th (2023) Texas Legislative Session, addressing Texas politics, history, electoral power, political strategy, and Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) bills that are currently at play in the Texas State Legislature.

Besides moderating, my specific contribution is to suggest how the role of Gen Z youth in the current moment might could get amplified.

Thanks a million to BBDP member and documentarian, Lana Husband, for recording this important conversation.

Enjoy!

-Angela Valenzuela

#GenZ #Diversity

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdGvgHus8tA&t=1616s

Texas Senate panel OKs ban on DEI offices, hiring in public universities. Here's why by Megan Menchaca

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.

Here's why.

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,

 universities. Here’s why.

'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 

race, sex. Is it an issue?