A GOP amendment to ban DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) mandates from New Hampshire state contracts was killed in the House Finance Committee in a 12-13 vote Tuesday, only to be resurrected a few hours later.
“Well, that was something,” a GOP House Republican told NHJournal on background after the amendment was passed in a 14-10 party-line vote.
The amendment was first presented to the committee on Monday. The vote was delayed for a day after objections from Democrats over the last-minute move — and intervention by Speaker of the House Sherm Packard (R-Londonderry).
Debate over the amendment was heated, with committee chair Kenneth Weyler (R-Kingston) claiming DEI mandates at the Federal Aviation Administration played a role in a series of recent airplane accidents, and a Democratic committee member claiming the anti-DEI amendment’s purpose is to “achieve a White male outcome.”
The latter accusation was made by Rep. David Preece (D-Manchester) and directed at Rep. Jess Edwards (R-Auburn). Edwards was trying to explain to Democrats that DEI mandates are “an attempt to proactively ensure quotas are met” and “the latest rebranding of affirmative action.”
Preece, who claimed (incorrectly) on Monday that ending DEI would mean no Black or female applicants would be hired for state jobs, pushed back.
“The demographic outcome that you want to achieve is that, basically, a White male outcome that you want to have in this state?” Preece pointedly asked.
“The outcome we want is that individual merit and talent, irrespective of the color of the skin, is the predominant reason why people are hired and promoted and succeed in life,” Edwards responded.
When House Democrats suggested banning DEI would mean banning protections for people with disabilities, Rep. Joseph Sweeney (R-Salem) read from the amendment.
“I just want to state that it’s all in the context of ‘race, sex, ethnicity, or other group characteristics for the purpose of achieving demographic outcomes.’ Accessibility in public schools and accessibility to public buildings is not ‘for the purpose of achieving demographic outcomes.’ It is really just on these programs, these policies, these trainings and initiatives that are based on ‘race, sex, ethnicity and other group characteristics for the purpose of achieving demographic outcomes’ that we are trying to make sure that state dollars going forward do not fund.”
That wasn’t clear enough for Rep. Chris Muns (D-Hampton).
“So, what does ‘demographic outcome’ mean? What is ‘implicit bias training?’ What is a ‘DEI assessment?’ Critical Race Theory? Oh, my God, probably the most misunderstood term in our political lexicon over the last four years.”
DEI policies are based on the Critical Race Theory premise that American institutions such as state government, universities, and private businesses are inherently racist and that all White people are, too. Therefore, there can be no race-neutral policies, only “racist” or “antiracist.” It’s a theory advanced by the now-discredited Ibram X. Kendi.
Several Democrats on the committee said the amendment did not belong in state budget deliberations, arguing that it constitutes a policy item.
“I haven’t heard anything about a fiscal impact,” said Rep. Rosemarie Rung (D-Merrimack). “This bill should not be part of the budget. This bill is about a policy that some people in the state want to adopt.”
“Why wasn’t a bill introduced during the normal course of business where there could be a full public hearing and full discussion within a committee with ample opportunity for amendments?” Munns added.
Republicans, such as Rep. Susan DeRoy (R-New Durham), offered a blunt response.
“I simply ask, when DEI was put into place years ago, did it come through this committee?” she said. “Did it come through at all? Did we have a House vote or anything? No.”
Rep. Lauren Telerski (D-Nashua) countered that DEI “is not a state policy.”
“I will agree with my colleague that this will no longer be a state policy after we finish adopting this,” quipped Rep. Daniel Popovici-Muller (R-Windham).
But when the time came to vote, Edwards was a “no,” as was Rep. Brian Seaworth (R-Pembroke). The amendment failed.
However, after a caucus meeting, Edwards moved to reconsider the amendment, a request backed by the GOP majority on the committee, and both Republicans voted yes.
“House Republicans ran on stopping DEI from destroying our state government and our public schools. Today’s amendment to HB2 does just that,” said Sweeney after the vote. “Prohibiting state dollars from funding racist and sexist DEI initiatives and programs is a crucial step towards ensuring individual merit and achievement, not collective despair, is the biggest determining factor in how we shape the future of the Granite State.”
