Black Lawmakers Offended After Being Left Out Of Anti-DEI Bill Passed In South Carolina House

How do you have DEI initiatives without diversity?

The South Carolina House passed a bill restricting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives at public colleges and universities, and Black lawmakers said they weren’t included in the proposal draft.

The Palmetto State GOPs celebrated an 84-30 vote on Mar. 27, passing the legislation after voting to restrict debate and prevent lawmakers from suggested changes. Black Democratic lawmakers refer to anti-DEI efforts as a “stand-in for fears of a woke bogeyman” while deeming DEI as necessary to guarantee schools meet the needs to increase diversity amongst student populations.

After bill sponsor, Republican Rep. Tim McGinnis said, “Everyone can be treated equally regardless of their background or their beliefs in the state of South Carolina.” Rep. Leon Howard, a lawmaker since 1995, said this doesn’t add up to boasting about equality, but limiting representation from its targeted audience. “We had no Black people involved in crafting this legislation, so y’all don’t know how we feel today,” Howard said.

“We feel some kind of way about that. We feel offended about that.”

The bill bans colleges from considering DEI factors when making decisions on student admission or hiring people; however, it lacks a solid definition of DEI. While the legislation allows colleges to keep DEI programs alive, the schools must report to the General Assembly on how much each program costs and how any complaints against them were resolved.

The good news is the bill will not conflict with grant applications or accreditation, which sometimes requires compliance statements with federal anti-discrimination laws.

Rep. Kambrell Garvin feels the bill adds to the growing discussion of continuing discrimination. “This bill stifles conversation,” Garvin said, according to ABC News 4.

“To me, there’s value in diversity, there’s value in equity, there’s value in inclusion. What this bill says is the progress and the strides that we have made obviously upsets many folks who have supported it.”

The lawyer and former educator added that the law makes things confusing for teachers and administrators regarding what’s accepted or not. “What this bill does is makes college professors and school boards all over our state uncertain about what is and what isn’t acceptable,” Garvin continued.

“If we have teachers who are teaching literally in fear that anything that they say can be misconstrued, they’re going to be less inclined to teach subjects that need to be fleshed out fully. That doesn’t advantage anybody. It’s a disadvantage to our learning environments.”

While Garvin thinks the legislation will cause more harm than good, the proposal must face the General Assembly’s session. With only six weeks left, the law is not a top priority, as two sessions will be focused on the state’s $13.2 billion budget.