Senate, House move closer to squashing local DEI

The Senate Judiciary Committee and House Civil Justice & Claims Subcommittee are the latest panels to advance legislation that would ban counties and cities from funding or promoting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI).

The measures from Sen. Clay Yarborough (SB 1134) and Rep. Dean Black (HB 1001) have been endorsed by Gov. Ron DeSantis. Each bill is one step away from the floor.

“Members, over more than a decade, we have seen the philosophy of diversity, equity and inclusion used to divide our society into competing factions. Not only have millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars been wasted in the name of DEI, this philosophy has fostered resentment instead of goodwill, mediocrity instead of merit, and divided our society against itself,” Black said Wednesday in the House panel.

If these move for a vote and facilitate what Black calls a “healing process” for the state, they will potentially bring big consequences to local elected officials who flout the law should this pass. Penalties include misfeasance or malfeasance charges and potential removal from office if the conflict persists.

The likelihood of a “healing process” is debatable. Rep. Bruce Antone, an Orlando Democrat, said he was “seething” as he listened to a proposal full of “bad stuff” that “creates further division.”

The bills would also allow people to sue local governments if they believe they are breaking the law, such as passing a bill or appropriation in conflict with its provisions.

That part of the proposal spurred some provocative questions in both committee meetings.

In the Senate panel, Democratic Sen. Tina Scott Polsky asked Yarborough if the suddenly newsy Kid Rock has standing to sue a city if he was excluded from a Hispanic music festival.

“We could go down a whole list of ‘what ifs’ and theorizing and all that,” Yarborough said, punting on the hypothetical.

Polsky brought up the official Super Bowl halftime show and Bad Bunny’s performance as an illustration of an unintended consequence to the bill.

“Just look what happened yesterday with the Super Bowl. I mean, because someone sang in Spanish, people thought it was un-American and unpatriotic, and you know if something like that happened (in an event) that the city promoted, somebody would sue under these circumstances,” Polsky predicted.

In the House, Black was asked to clarify whether “White supremacists” could sue under this bill.

“You might sue for any reason,” he said. “Even a bad one. Even a frivolous one. And we have safeguards in the court system to safeguard against this.”

DEI would be defined, per the bill, as any effort to “manipulate or otherwise influence the composition of employees with reference to race, color, sex, ethnicity, gender identity, or sexual orientation other than to ensure that hiring is conducted in accordance with state and federal antidiscrimination laws.”

Additionally, “preferential treatment” and “special benefits” based on specific demographic criteria would be banned, as would diversity training.

However, “equal opportunity” would be protected, as would commemorations such as Black History Month.

An amendment adopted in the committees defines the term “acting in an official capacity,” clarifies that public funds may not be used for DEI, and adds language protecting local governments from contract disputes with contractors.

For Black, the money spent is a major issue.

“Over the past decade, some of our local governments, they’ve gone a little crazy,” he said in close. “I can point to examples that even the most vigorous opponent of this bill would not be able to defend. Local governments are spending millions and millions and millions of dollars.”

Democrats in the Senate and House aren’t enamored with what they call a “vague” bill that will create unintended consequences regarding how the bill will work, the culture war issues the legislation plays into, or what it will do to local governments.

“This bill tells local governments they are not allowed to do this work. This bill doesn’t even protect public servants. It punishes them for trying to build fair workplaces. Erasing DEI does not make government neutral and makes it blind — blind to disparities, blind to risk, blind to lived experience of the people we serve,” said Rep. Michelle Rayner.

For his part, Yarborough said he’s ready to discuss amendments.

“This is not done yet. There’s a House bill moving. This is the Senate Bill and its second stop. There’s a ways to go. We have a time constraint in our process. That’s fine. But we still have the opportunity to make it better. And I mean it when I say the door is open.”