The Dismantle DEI Act won't create equality. It will maintain disadvantage
As someone who has spent the last several years helping justice-impacted individuals, especially Black and brown youth, find meaningful pathways in education and employment, I've seen up close what a lack of opportunity looks like — and what intentional inclusion can do to change that.
That's why the Tennessee House of Representatives' swift passage of the 'Dismantle DEI Act' (House Bill 622) by a 73-to-24 vote on April 17 should alarm everyone in the state, regardless of political affiliation. This wasn't just a vote. It was a clear refusal to engage in the democratic process over a matter that affects thousands of lives and futures across this state.
On April 22, the Tennessee Senate voted 27-6 to approve companion Senate Bill 1083. It now goes to Gov. Bill Lee for his consideration before becoming law.
Supporters of the bill argue that diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts amount to discrimination − even calling them 'communist' and 'racist.' But let's step away from slogans and look at the facts.
A 2023 report by McKinsey & Company found that companies with diverse executive teams were 39% more likely to outperform their peers on profitability.
In higher education, DEI programs have led to increased enrollment and graduation rates among first-generation students, students of color, and low-income students − all demographics that are traditionally underserved in Tennessee.
That's not ideology. That's impact.
Tennessee's public universities serve a student body that is increasingly diverse. At the University of Tennessee at Knoxville, students of color made up more than 20% of the 2023 incoming freshman class.
DEI programs aren't about favoritism — they are about ensuring that all students, regardless of where they come from, have a fair shot at success.
Removing those supports doesn't create equality. It just maintains old systems that already disadvantage the few.
And if you want to talk about fairness, let's talk about how the bill was passed. There was no debate. No discussion. A quick procedural move was used to silence dissent. That's not transparency. That's suppression. If DEI is so dangerous, why not let it be debated openly on the floor?
As a Black business owner, a nonprofit founder, and someone who's successfully navigated reentry after over a decade behind bars, I know what happens when the system doesn't see you. I also know what happens when it finally does. I am a product of second chances and deliberate inclusion. The people I now serve − youth in crisis, men and women returning home from incarceration − are proof that inclusion works. Equity isn't about making people special. It's about making opportunity real.
By dismantling DEI, the legislature isn't protecting fairness. They're dismantling progress. And doing it without debate? That tells me they were never interested in listening to the people who would be most affected.
We deserve better. Our students, our workforce, our future — they all depend on it.
Tristan Buckner is the founder of Live X-perience, a nonprofit serving at-risk youth and justice-impacted individuals in Tennessee. He is also the developer of several reentry and workforce development programs for correctional facilities and returning citizens.
This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Tennessee's Dismantle DEI Act is dismantling progress | Opinion
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
28 minutes ago
- New York Post
Kathy Hochul's gutless silence on assisted suicide is a betrayal: Rep. Stefanik
Last month, Gov. Kathy Hochul attacked Republicans for their budget bill that aims to rein in wasteful and fraudulent federal spending. 'I believe that we should try to prevent our constituents from dying,' she declared. Now, just two weeks later, New Yorkers have proof that these words from Hochul's lips are a cruel lie. My heart shatters for our state: Hochul's gutless silence on the so-called assisted suicide bill passed by Albany's far-left Democrats isn't just cowardice; it's a betrayal of every New Yorker clinging to hope, a dagger in the backs of the vulnerable she swore to protect. In the last days of this year's legislative session, New York state Senate Democrats forced through a despicable measure, in a 35-27 vote, empowering doctors to prescribe lethal drugs to the terminally ill. This isn't 'dignity' or 'choice,' but a death sentence cloaked in deception, telling our elderly, our disabled and our sick that their lives aren't worth fighting for. The bill now sits on Hochul's desk, and where is she? Hiding. Silent. Dodging with a spineless 'she'll review the legislation' statement from her team. All while families of all political and spiritual backgrounds, all across New York, weep at the thought of our state allowing companies to profit off death. Hochul's hypocrisy knows no bounds. New York ranks dead last in access to palliative care, a compassionate lifeline that eases suffering and restores dignity for the terminally ill. Palliative care envelops patients in holistic support to manage pain and address emotional and spiritual needs, and it helps families navigate the unthinkable. It's doctors and nurses sitting bedside, listening to fears and crafting plans that honor life. It's the hand squeezed during a sleepless night, the reassurance that no one faces the end alone. Yet in Hochul's New York, only a fraction of those who need palliative services can access them — leaving the suffering to beg for comfort while leftist Democrats under her watch push a culture of death and despair. This failure compounds a broader crisis caused by Kathy Hochul's worthless leadership. One in five New Yorkers battles mental illness yearly, and hundreds of thousands go untreated. Those who live with disabilities are crushed by a cruel bureaucratic maze, worsened by Hochul's heartless overhaul of the Consumer Directed Personal Assistance Program, which put the desires of politically connected contractors over the needs of suffering families and caregivers. Again and again, her policies destroy hope for those in need — and yet she stands mute and inept as her party peddles a bill that whispers 'Give up' to a depressed veteran, tells a grandmother with cancer 'You're a burden' and screams to a disabled New Yorker, 'Your life isn't worth saving.' It's anti-human, it's anti-American, and it's a betrayal of the values that bind us as New Yorkers. Hochul's silence here speaks volumes, and it isn't indecision but complicity, trading vulnerable lives for political points with her far-left Democrat base. New Yorkers are heartbroken and furious. Under Hochul's catastrophic reign, crime surges, costs crush families, corruption festers — and now the sanctity of life itself is under assault. People are fleeing to Florida and other states, driven out by the worst governor in America who fails them at every turn. Hochul has the power to veto this moral travesty. She could champion life by investing in palliative care that wraps the suffering in dignity and love. Instead, her silence screams surrender. I won't stay silent. My heart burns for the mother praying for one more day with her child, for the disabled New Yorker fighting for respect, for every soul this bill would discard. New York needs real leadership — robust palliative-care programs, accessible mental-health services and dignified support for the disabled — not a state-encouraged push toward the grave. In 2026, New Yorkers will reject this failed governor at the ballot box and restore principled leadership that cherishes every life. Kathy Hochul, the clock is ticking. Veto this bill or you'll be remembered as the governor who truly let hope die. New Yorkers are watching — and we won't forget. Republican Elise Stefanik represents New York's 21st District in Congress.
Newsweek
42 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Disapproval of Democrats in Congress Ticks Upward—New Poll
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Voters' disapproval of Democratic members in Congress has increased since February, according to a new Quinnipiac poll. Newsweek reached out to the Senate and House Minority leaders, as well as the Democratic National Committee, via email on Wednesday for comment. Why It Matters Last November marked a pivotal election in the United States, with Donald Trump returning to the White House after winning both the popular vote and the Electoral College. The scale of the Republican Party's triumph in November—taking the White House, flipping the Senate, and maintaining control of the House—has sparked soul-searching within the Democratic Party over what went wrong and how to rebuild. The Democratic Party has struggled with unpopularity and internal dissatisfaction since the sweeping defeat, facing pronounced ideological and generational divides, compounded by widespread voter frustration with congressional leaders and the party's overall direction. Democratic leaders have come under criticism from within, some for pushing the party too far left, and others for appearing too conciliatory toward Trump, and a number who have felt disillusioned with its agenda have left the party entirely to either identify as independent or as a Republican. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (L) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (C) speak alongside other congressional Democrats outside the U.S. Capitol on April 1, 2025. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (L) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (C) speak alongside other congressional Democrats outside the U.S. Capitol on April 1, 2025. Francis Chung/POLITICO via AP Images What To Know A Quinnipiac University Poll of 1,265 registered voters nationwide, conducted between June 5 and June 9, found that disapproval of Democrats in Congress has increased since a February poll. Seventy percent of participants said they disapprove of how Democrats are handling their jobs in Congress, while 21 percent approve. Among Democrats, 53 percent disapprove, and 41 percent approve. Just 9 percent of Republicans approve of Democrats' performance, while 84 percent disapprove. A similar Quinnipiac University poll of 1,039 registered voters in February found that 68 percent of participants disapproved of congressional Democrats and 52 percent disapproved of congressional Republicans. The June poll found that 61 percent of participants disapproved of congressional Republicans' handling of their jobs, while 32 percent approved. Among Republicans, 79 percent approve, and 13 percent disapprove. In contrast, only 2 percent of Democrats said they approve of Republicans' handling of their jobs, with 97 percent disapproving. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.8 percentage points. Other polls, like a May poll from the Associated Press and NORC at the University of Chicago, found that most Democrats are not particularly optimistic about their own party. The poll, which surveyed 1,175 adults nationwide from May 1 to May 5, found only 35 percent of Democrats are optimistic about the party's future, while 36 percent are pessimistic. Twenty-nine percent said they are neither. The latest figures are worse for Democrats than in July 2024, when a poll found that 57 percent were optimistic about the party's future. Twenty-six percent were pessimistic, while 16 percent said they felt neither way. That earlier poll was conducted from July 25 to July 29 among 1,148 adults, just days after former President Joe Biden dropped out of the 2024 race and endorsed his vice president, Kamala Harris. In the early days of the Harris campaign, many Democrats felt hopeful about her chances of victory, as polls showed her more competitive against Trump than Biden, who had faced growing questions about his ability to lead the country for another four years. Polling showing disapproval with the Democrats comes after party divisions widened in the wake of Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and several colleagues supporting a Trump-backed Republican spending bill, a move that triggered internal backlash and led to calls for new leadership and more aggressive opposition to Trump's policies. However, YouGov's congressional ballot tracker, which tests which party voters would choose in a congressional election, shows that the Democrats are more than 1.5 points ahead of the Republicans, with 43.9 percent to the GOP's 42.6 percent. What People Are Saying John Feehery, a partner at EFB Advocacy, told Newsweek: "The Democrats are not leading their activists but being led by their activists. And the American people don't like their activists because they are mostly crazy." Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, speculated as a potential presidential candidate for Democrats, said in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, in May: "Democrats do not have the best brand around here or in a lot of places. There's a lot of reasons for that. Some fair, and some not fair." Former White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, in a statement about her book: "Until January 20, I was responsible for speaking on behalf of the President of the United States. At noon on that day, I became a private citizen who, like all Americans and many of our allies around the world, had to contend with what was to come next for our country. I determined that the danger we face as a country requires freeing ourselves of boxes. We need to be willing to exercise the ability to think creatively and plan strategically." CNN pollster Harry Enten said in May: "These numbers should be a major wake-up call for Democrats. Democrats cannot count their chickens just yet, because those eggs have not cracked at this particular moment." What Happens Next Democrats are continuing to work out the direction of the party as they prepare for the 2026 midterms, when they aim to win back voters who shifted toward Trump last year.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Trump EPA moves to repeal climate rules that limit greenhouse gas emissions from US power plants
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday proposed repealing rules that limit planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from power plants fueled by coal and natural gas, an action that Administrator Lee Zeldin said would remove billions of dollars in costs for industry and help 'unleash' American energy. The EPA also proposed weakening a regulation that requires power plants to reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants that can harm brain development of young children and contribute to heart attacks and other health problems in adults. The rollbacks are meant to fulfill Republican President Donald Trump's repeated pledge to 'unleash American energy' and make it more affordable for Americans to power their homes and operate businesses. If approved and made final, the plans would reverse efforts by Democratic President Joe Biden's administration to address climate change and improve conditions in areas heavily burdened by industrial pollution, mostly in low-income and majority Black or Hispanic communities. The power plant rules are among about 30 environmental regulations that Zeldin targeted in March when he announced what he called the 'most consequential day of deregulation in American history.' Zeldin said Wednesday the new rules would help end what he called the Biden and Obama administration's 'war on so much of our U.S. domestic energy supply.' 'The American public spoke loudly and clearly last November,' he added in a speech at EPA headquarters. 'They wanted to make sure that … no matter what agency anybody might be confirmed to lead, we are finding opportunities to pursue common-sense, pragmatic solutions that will help reduce the cost of living … create jobs and usher in a golden era of American prosperity.' Environmental and public health groups called the rollbacks dangerous and vowed to challenge the rules in court. Dr. Lisa Patel, a pediatrician and executive director of the Medical Society Consortium on Climate & Health, called the proposals 'yet another in a series of attacks' by the Trump administration on the nation's 'health, our children, our climate and the basic idea of clean air and water.' She called it 'unconscionable to think that our country would move backwards on something as common sense as protecting children from mercury and our planet from worsening hurricanes, wildfires, floods and poor air quality driven by climate change.' 'Ignoring the immense harm to public health from power plant pollution is a clear violation of the law,' added Manish Bapna, president and CEO of the Natural Resources Defense Council. 'If EPA finalizes a slapdash effort to repeal those rules, we'll see them in court.' The EPA-targeted rules could prevent an estimated 30,000 deaths and save $275 billion each year they are in effect, according to an Associated Press examination that included the agency's own prior assessments and a wide range of other research. It's by no means guaranteed that the rules will be entirely eliminated — they can't be changed without going through a federal rulemaking process that can take years and requires public comment and scientific justification. Even a partial dismantling of the rules would mean more pollutants such as smog, mercury and lead — and especially more tiny airborne particles that can lodge in lungs and cause health problems, the AP analysis found. It would also mean higher emissions of the greenhouse gases driving Earth's warming to deadlier levels. Biden, a Democrat, had made fighting climate change a hallmark of his presidency. Coal-fired power plants would be forced to capture smokestack emissions or shut down under a strict EPA rule issued last year. Then-EPA head Michael Regan said the power plant rules would reduce pollution and improve public health while supporting a reliable, long-term supply of electricity. The power sector is the nation's second-largest contributor to climate change, after transportation. In its proposed regulation, the Trump EPA argues that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from fossil fuel-fired power plants 'do not contribute significantly to dangerous pollution' or climate change and therefore do not meet a threshold under the Clean Air Act for regulatory action. Greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fired plants 'are a small and decreasing part of global emissions,' the EPA said, adding: 'this Administration's priority is to promote the public health or welfare through energy dominance and independence secured by using fossil fuels to generate power.' The Clean Air Act allows the EPA to limit emissions from power plants and other industrial sources if those emissions significantly contribute to air pollution that endangers public health. If fossil fuel plants no longer meet the EPA's threshold, the Trump administration may later argue that other pollutants from other industrial sectors don't either and therefore shouldn't be regulated, said Meghan Greenfield, a former EPA and Justice Department lawyer now in private practice. The EPA proposal 'has the potential to have much, much broader implications,' she said. Zeldin, a former New York congressman, said the Biden-era rules were designed to 'suffocate our economy in order to protect the environment,' with the intent to regulate the coal industry 'out of existence' and make it 'disappear.' National Mining Association president and CEO Rich Nolan applauded the new rules, saying they remove 'deliberately unattainable standards' for clean air while 'leveling the playing field for reliable power sources, instead of stacking the deck against them.' But Dr. Howard Frumkin, a former director of the National Center for Environmental Health and professor emeritus at the University of Washington School of Public Health, said Zeldin and Trump were trying to deny reality. 'The world is round, the sun rises in the east, coal-and gas-fired power plants contribute significantly to climate change, and climate change increases the risk of heat waves, catastrophic storms and many other health threats,' Frumkin said. 'These are indisputable facts. If you torpedo regulations on power plant greenhouse gas emissions, you torpedo the health and well-being of the American public and contribute to leaving a world of risk and suffering to our children and grandchildren.' A paper published earlier this year in the journal Science found the Biden-era rules could reduce U.S. power sector carbon emissions by 73% to 86% below 2005 levels by 2040, compared with a reduction of 60% to 83% without the rules. 'Carbon emissions in the power sector drop at a faster rate with the (Biden-era) rules in place than without them,' said Aaron Bergman, a fellow at Resources for the Future, a nonprofit research institution and a co-author of the Science paper. The Biden rule also would result in 'significant reductions in sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, pollutants that harm human health,' he said.
