There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Republican lawmakers are backing dozens of bills targeting diversity efforts on campus and elsewhere

Diversity initiatives would be defunded or banned from universities and other public institutions under a slate of bills pending in Republican-led legislatures, with some lawmakers counting on the issue resonating with voters in this election year.

Already this year, Republican lawmakers have proposed about 50 bills in 20 states that would restrict initiatives on diversity, equity and inclusion — known as DEI — or require their public disclosure, according to an Associated Press analysis using the bill-tracking software Plural.

This is the second year Republican-led state governments have targeted DEI. This year’s bills, as well as executive orders and internal agency directives, again focus heavily on higher education. But the legislation also would limit DEI in K-12 schools, state government, contracting and pension investments. Some bills would bar financial institutions from discriminating against those who refuse to participate in DEI programs.

Meanwhile, Democrats have filed about two dozen bills in 11 states that would require or promote DEI initiatives. The bills cover a broad spectrum, including measures to reverse Florida’s recent ban on DEI in higher education and measures to require DEI considerations in K-12 school curricula in Washington state.

testfactor ,

Can someone who works in an institution that uses DEI metrics in the hiring process explain them for me? I’m a left leaning person for sure, but I can see why the Republicans would think this issue would resonate with the voters.

I know that DEI metrics are only “allowed to be used to differentiate between two, otherwise identical candidates for a position.”

And while that seems reasonable on the surface, it does beg some follow-up questions. Like, “who identifies if two candidates are identical or not,” and “how ‘identical’ do the two candidates need to be (exactly the same, 1% variance, 10%)?”

It seems like, as a system, while it should notionally only be used to distinguish between equally qualified candidates, is ill-defined enough that the actual “on the ground” outcome would be to favor less qualified candidates who belong to DEI targeted groups out of a sense of “erring on the side of caution,” as it were.

I also fail to see how DEI initiatives that allow you to take race into account are better than systems that require blind interviews, where the race of the person isn’t ever made clear to the interviewer? It seems like that should appeal to both sides, no? Why push to consider race as a placement criteria over just eliminating the issue all together?

I feel like some may push back against that and say that it disadvantages minorities due to systematic racial issues resulting in poorer resumes or performance on phone interviews, perpetuating systematic racism under the guise of eliminating race from the selection process. And while I’m sympathetic to that argument, it does somewhat contradict the first argument about distinguishing between “otherwise equal candidates,” does it not?

But, as I say, all this is from the perspective of a left leaning layman who has absolutely no hand in implementing any of these initiatives. I’d really be very interested to hear how these issues are handled in the real world, and why blind interview processes aren’t used instead.

Thanks!

ChonkyOwlbear ,

Keep in mind that there have always been (and still are) people in the hiring process making decisions on biased metrics like “women can’t work as hard” or “black people might steal”. There is already a thumb on the scale, DEI just rebalances the scale.

testfactor ,

But surely the correct solution is to remove bias altogether rather than replacing non-codified past bias with codified future bias, right?

Like, surely we should be trying to eliminate bias completely?

I’m sympathetic to those arguments that equality is not the same as equity, and that in some cases some form of reparation needs to be made to account for past bias. The issue is that, if that’s the line you take here, then you are in fact doing what the Republicans claim, and putting less qualified people into positions that could have major impacts on the lives of other people.

And maybe your stance is that that’s fine, and it’s not that big a deal to hire less qualified candidates if it helps fix systematic racial issues. But I think then that what the Republicans are claiming is in fact just true, and they are probably right that most Americans will find that unpalatable.

ChonkyOwlbear ,

You can’t remove people’s negative bias by passing laws. You can only limit the damage done by these biases.

Part of the argument here is that diversity itself has value, so that all other things equal the diverse choice is superior not just as a reparation but functionally as well.

BigMacHole ,

But Republicans told me we can’t stop School Shootings because Laws don’t Work?

FaceDeer ,
@FaceDeer@kbin.social avatar

Already this year, Republican lawmakers have proposed about 50 bills in 20 states that would restrict initiatives on diversity, equity and inclusion — known as DEI — or require their public disclosure

Emphasis added. Wow, a thing that actually sounds like a good idea buried in among the usual Republican crazy. I guess a broken clock is still right occasionally.

DemBoSain ,
@DemBoSain@midwest.social avatar

Remember, this is the “Party of Lincoln”, once again backing segregation.

spider ,

Remember, this is the “Party of Lincoln”

Not really; it has mutated.

DemBoSain ,
@DemBoSain@midwest.social avatar

I was hoping the quotes would indicate sarcasm, but instead they just indicated a quote.

spider , (edited )

Not really; it has mutated.

(/s switch, long version)

Cuttlefish1111 ,

We need to start seeing meaningful actions against these theocrats or dark times are ahead.

DogPeePoo ,

Republican lawmakers back Sharia law and rape legalization

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •