logo
Panel OKs proposed removal of racial and gender quotas for Arkansas boards and commissions

Panel OKs proposed removal of racial and gender quotas for Arkansas boards and commissions

Yahoo04-03-2025
Laura D'Agostino (left), equality and opportunity attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation, expresses support for House Bill 1365, sponsored by Rep. Karilyn Brown (right), R-Sherwood, before the House Committee on State Agencies and Governmental Affairs on Monday, March 3, 2025. (Tess Vrbin/Arkansas Advocate)
An Arkansas legislative panel revived a debate over whether government entities should consider race, gender or other characteristics or experiences before approving a previously failed bill Monday.
House Bill 1365 would remove race and gender quotas and qualifications from a variety of state boards, councils and commissions, altering 22 sections of state law. Bill sponsor Rep. Karilyn Brown, R-Sherwood, and attorney Laura D'Agostino said current requirements to have minimum numbers of women and racial minorities on the panels are unfair.
Boards, councils and commissions that would no longer be required to have Black, Hispanic, female or other historically underrepresented members include:
The State Board of Education
The Arkansas Ethics Commission
The Arkansas State Board of Pharmacy
The Commission on Closing the Achievement Gap in Arkansas
The State Athletic Commission
The Arkansas Financial Education Commission
The Arkansas Teacher Retirement System Board of Trustees
The Arkansas Tobacco Control Board
D'Agostino, who is based in Virginia and works for the California law firm Pacific Legal Foundation, said Arkansas could be vulnerable to lawsuits for unequal treatment of its citizens as the law currently stands.
'People are so complex and different that it's extremely demeaning to say, 'Well, if you're of this racial perspective or if you're a woman, you're automatically going to bring a diverse perspective,'' D'Agostino said. '…The government should not be in a position to use racial classifications to either think that it knows better than its own people or to tell people that it's being culturally responsive because it's assuming that people [in the same group] have the same perspectives.'
Brown and D'Agostino repeatedly said passing HB 1365 will increase, not decrease, opportunities for all Arkansans. Their arguments were similar to those of the sponsors of Act 116 of 2025, originally Senate Bill 3, which became law in February after much debate in both chambers.
Act 116 will 'prohibit discrimination or preferential treatment' by public entities and eliminate required minority recruitment and retention plans and reports from public school districts and higher education institutions. The law's Republican sponsors, Rep. Mary Bentley of Perryville and Sen. Dan Sullivan of Jonesboro, said it will prioritize merit over demographics.
HB 1365 'seems much more straightforward and narrowly tailored than SB 3,' said Rep. David Ray, R-Maumelle.
Ray was one of 13 of the 20 members of the House Committee on State Agencies and Governmental Affairs who voted for HB 1365, while the panel's three Democrats were the only members to vote against it. The committee failed to pass the bill when it was first heard Feb. 12, since several members were absent, and the bill received nine votes for it when at least 11 were needed.
Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders is responsible for appointing people to most boards and commissions, and D'Agostino and Ray both said any governor who does not consider a range of experiences among Arkansans when making appointments will be accountable to the voters.
No members of the public spoke for or against HB 1365 Monday, but committee discussion lasted more than an hour before the vote.
House Minority Leader Andrew Collins, D-Little Rock, noted that the Arkansas House in decades past was entirely composed of white men.
'I think that the Legislatures of the past, who realized the errors we made in over-erring on the the side of letting the old boys' network run its course, realized that there's value in having people who look different and have different backgrounds in the room making decisions, especially when we're talking about things like minority health [and] closing the achievement gap,' Collins said.
Rep. Denise Ennett, also a Little Rock Democrat, said her constituents who are racial minorities have told her for years that they've had trouble being appointed to state boards and commissions on which they want to serve. She said this highlighted the need to keep the racial quotas as they are.
Brown insisted that 'diversity occurs naturally' and the state should not codify language that 'makes things more awkward or more difficult to fill positions.'
'With all due respect, I think this language came about because diversity wasn't happening naturally,' said Rep. Nicole Clowney, D-Fayetteville.
Clowney repeated her statement from the committee's Act 116 debate that she had yet to hear concrete examples of harm resulting from the state's current laws focused on diversity, equity and inclusion.
D'Agostino said Pacific Legal Foundation once represented a white man in Arkansas who sought appointment to the state Social Work Licensing Board but could not be appointed because of the requirement for minority members. She said the lawsuit became moot after Sanders signed Act 254 of 2023, which removed the board's requirement that at least two of its nine members be African American.
Act 254 passed both chambers of the Legislature with solely Republican support.
HB 1365 will next go to the full House for consideration.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump approval holds at 40%, lowest of his term, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds
Trump approval holds at 40%, lowest of his term, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds

USA Today

time33 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Trump approval holds at 40%, lowest of his term, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds

WASHINGTON, Aug 18 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump's approval rating held at 40% in recent weeks, matching the lowest level of his current term, amid weak ratings from Hispanic voters, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll that closed on Monday. The six-day poll was conducted as economic data showed signs the U.S. labor market is weakening and as Trump oversees a sweeping immigration crackdown, while at the same time the Republican has been engaged in intense diplomacy to end a war between Russia and Ukraine. Trump's approval rating was unchanged from a late July Reuters/Ipsos poll, but has dropped seven percentage points since his first days back in the White House in January, when 47% of Americans gave him a thumbs-up. The latest poll showed Hispanics, a group that swung toward Trump in last year's election, have also soured on the president. Some 32% approved of his performance in the White House, matching their lowest level of approval for Trump this year. More: Trump approval rating round-up: Where does president stand in recent polls? More than half of respondents -- 54%, including one in five Republicans -- said they thought Trump was too closely aligned with Russia, even as he ramped up a push to broker peace between Moscow and Kyiv. Trump has appeared to embrace Russia's claim that Ukraine must cede territory to Russia in order for the war to stop. Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday, and the poll closed just ahead of the president's meeting on Monday with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy. Just 42% of respondents approved of Trump's performance on crime and 43% thought he was doing a good job on immigration policy. On all policies, Trump's support came overwhelmingly from Republicans. After returning to the White House in January, Trump ordered a sweeping crackdown on people living in the country illegally, deploying masked agents to arrest and deport migrants across the country. The policy has triggered mass protests in cities including Los Angeles, where about half the population identifies as Latino and many people have family members who are recent immigrants. More: What is Trump's approval rating? See states where he is most, least popular More recently, Trump ordered federal agents and National Guard troops to aid in law enforcement in Washington, D.C., arguing that crime was rampant there. Statistics show that violent crime shot up in 2023 but has been rapidly declining since. The Reuters/Ipsos poll surveyed 4,446 U.S. adults nationwide and online and had a margin of error of about 2 percentage points. (Reporting by Jason Lange; editing by Scott Malone and Deepa Babington)

Black people on campuses support fighting antisemitism and also wonder, ‘What about us?'
Black people on campuses support fighting antisemitism and also wonder, ‘What about us?'

Los Angeles Times

time33 minutes ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Black people on campuses support fighting antisemitism and also wonder, ‘What about us?'

Antisemitism is abhorrent. No Jewish person should ever experience it, and universities must do all they can to eradicate it on campuses. The Trump administration is pushing colleges and universities to address antisemitism by threatening, freezing and revoking federal funding and demanding millions of dollars to settle allegations — or in UCLA's case, $1 billion. These unprecedented federal penalties, which the government claims are partially for failing to address antisemitism, leave lots of Black people who either attended or worked at predominantly white institutions asking, 'What about us?' Reports of antisemitism sound familiar to Black people who have encountered anti-Black harassment in similar forms. Generations of Black collegians and employees have been called racial slurs on campuses. The N-word also has been spray-painted and nooses have been hung on Black students' dorms, on Black culture centers and on portraits and statues of influential Black people across campuses. Student body presidents who are Black, as well as other Black student organization leaders and employees, have received death threats. One social media post promised: 'I'm going to stand my ground tomorrow and shoot every black person I see.' Black people have been physically assaulted on campus grounds; been threatened and targeted by white supremacist hate groups who gain access to campuses; and been racially profiled by campus security personnel. Black campus police officers have reported experiencing 'unbearable' racism themselves. For decades, predominantly white sororities and fraternities have denied Black students membership on the basis of race. Additionally, too many Greek-letter organizations have hosted blackface parties mocking Black people, including some attendees wearing nooses around their necks and others pretending to be enslaved Africans or white enslavers. These and other encounters with anti-Black racism are long-standing, persistent and pervasive. Asking 'what about us' is not intended to diminish the severity of antisemitism or the dangers that Jewish students face. Posing this question also does not indicate that Black people are antisemitic. It comes neither from a standpoint of hatred toward nor carelessness for Jewish people. In fact, firsthand encounters with unchecked racism and harassment on campuses deepen many Black people's empathy for and outrage on behalf of anyone experiencing discrimination and hate, including Jews. And many Jewish people who are Black know such hostility all too well, having faced both antisemitism and anti-Black racism. According to FBI data published in 2024, of the 950 religiously motivated hate crimes that occurred at educational institutions between 2018 and 2022, 78.4% were targeted at Jewish people. That is terrible and unacceptably high. During those same years, the statistics also show that of the 2,624 racially motivated hate crimes on campuses, 64.4% were targeted at Black people. That also is terrible and unacceptably high. Educational institutions across the U.S. clearly have serious problems with hate crimes against both Jewish and Black people. But for some reason, the Trump administration is neglecting to hold colleges and universities financially accountable for one like it is the other. For more than two decades, I have conducted research on campus racial climates. Surveys of and interviews with millions of students, faculty and staff on hundreds of campuses turned up numerous examples of antisemitism and far more examples of anti-Black racism. Volume and frequency do not make one any more or less important than the other. Both deserve fierce institutional and governmental responses. Islamophobia, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, weight and body-type bias, ableism, ageism and every other form of discrimination and abuse also deserve the most serious forms of accountability. But that has not happened, at least not in the manner or to the extent that it is occurring now in the name of combating antisemitism. There is shamefully abundant evidence of attacks on Jewish people on campuses. This warrants an immediate response by the federal government, by campus leaders, by state officials and anyone else who has the power to effect change. Meanwhile, Black students and employees are also continuing to experience unforgivably high levels of racial discrimination, harassment and abuse. Why is this not receiving a serious response from the Trump administration? Why has no college or university ever been required or expected to pay $1 billion (or any amount close to that) for the racial discrimination and violence that Black people endure on campuses? From today onward, what price will institutions of higher education pay for anti-Black racism? Shaun Harper is a professor of education, business and public policy at USC and the author of 'The Big Lie About Race in America's Schools.'

White House: Half of D.C. crackdown arrests are in high-crime areas
White House: Half of D.C. crackdown arrests are in high-crime areas

Axios

time2 hours ago

  • Axios

White House: Half of D.C. crackdown arrests are in high-crime areas

Nearly half of non-immigration-related arrests during President Trump's D.C. takeover have taken place in two of the most crime-ridden areas, according to an analysis the White House shared with Axios. Why it matters: The figures refute critics who claimed the takeover was all for show or was not targeting high-crime areas, per a White House official who crunched the numbers this weekend. The big picture: Trump's D.C. takeover is unprecedented, as is the use of White House staff to analyze metropolitan crime data. Images of National Guard troops patrolling touristy areas, protesters chanting at police and masked agents arresting people on the streets have dominated headlines and chatter on social media for days. By the numbers: 212 people have been arrested for various crimes during the federal takeover since Aug. 8, according to White House data that excludes all immigration-related arrests. 101 of those arrests, or 48%, took place in Wards 7 and 8, home to many low-income and working-class majority-Black neighborhoods of Washington. They have long experienced the most violent crime in the city. There were 24 gun-related charges in Ward 8, and 11 in Ward 7. Altogether, there were 31 narcotics-related charges, seven DUIs, and two assaults. Meanwhile, immigration-related arrests since Aug. 8 total 164. What they're saying: Throughout the city, National Guard troops are stationed in "high traffic areas to provide a visible law enforcement presence to deter crime," the White House official said. The White House declined to release information about where officers and troops were specifically stationed, or crime data for other individual wards. The official pulled the crime data in response to critics and the Washington Post 's reporting that tracked federal law enforcement whereabouts, using verified social media posts and reporters' observations. The outlet reported more law enforcement presence downtown in areas with lower crime rates than in Wards 7 and 8. The D.C. mayor's office, which has criticized the takeover, declined Axios' request to comment. The Metropolitan Police Department did not return an email seeking verification of the arrest data. But Trump, calling crime "out of control" in the district, took over D.C. police for 30 days in the city after a DOGE staffer was beaten and bloodied in an attempted carjacking involving a group of young people. Critics call it an authoritarian over-reaction. Trump swiped Monday at pundits and critics of his D.C. takeover by exaggerating the crime problem in the city, which he called "the most unsafe place anywhere." He said, "friends are calling" to thank him for making the city so safe that they can finally eat out after four years. "The press says, 'he's a dictator. He's trying to take over.' No," Trump said during an Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, "All I want is security for our people ... and the restaurants the last two days were busier than they've been in a long time."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store