We are writing this petition to express our strong opposition of Senate Bill 17, which aims to ban DEI efforts in Texas. Please join us in this movement, and sign this petition to show your support and help strengthen our efforts!

Dear

Sen. Charles Creighton
Sen. Mayes Middleton
Sen. Donna Campbell
Sen. Phil King
Sen. Lois Kolkhorst
Sen. Tan Parker
Sen. Angela Paxton
Sen. Charles Schwertner
Sen. Drew Springer

We, students and faculty of the UT system, are writing to you today to express our strong opposition to Senate Bill 17, which aims to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts in higher education. We urge you to vote against this bill because it would be extremely detrimental to the academic infrastructure and negatively impact the state’s economic, competitive, and innovative success. 

DEI efforts are designed to close the systemic disparities that exist in historically marginalized groups including people of different races, ethnicities, religions, genders, socioeconomic status, abilities, neurodiversity, and sexual orientation. DEI efforts do not provide preferential consideration to these marginalized groups as erroneously suggested by SB17, instead, they constitute an essential effort to dismantle the vestiges of discrimination against them. Importantly, DEI efforts are not in conflict with meritocracy; rather, they aim to ensure that all individuals, regardless of their background, have an equal opportunity to succeed based on their talents and hard work. In doing so, DEI initiatives seek to provide equal recognition of merit among all backgrounds and promote a truly meritocratic society. 

Historically marginalized groups have not been proportionally represented in higher education. According to the 2020 U.S. Census Bureau, Hispanics and Whites each make up about 40% of the Texas population. However, less than 16% of Hispanics attend a higher education institution compared to 40% of Whites(1). Furthermore, the 2021 American Community Survey reveals that Texans of color are more likely to be low-income(2). Black and Hispanic families are three times more likely to experience poverty in Texas compared to White families (Hispanics 21.8%, Blacks 21.9%, White 7.6%), which results in unequal access to educational and employment opportunities(2). These statistics underscore the societal disparities that create obstacles for certain groups to access higher education, resulting in lifelong disadvantages(3-6). The aim of “Equity”, within DEI efforts, is to help amend these disparities for disadvantaged students by setting them up for success. 

In addition, DEI efforts are not just about promoting fairness and social justice. They are also essential for creating a competitive, forward-thinking, and innovative higher education landscape in Texas. In a rapidly changing and interconnected global stage, success depends on the ability to embrace and leverage diversity in all its forms(7-9). By banning DEI efforts, we would be throwing away one of our most valuable assets: a diverse student body and faculty that can offer fresh perspectives, innovative solutions, and unique skill sets. Moreover, banning DEI efforts would send an intractable message to students and faculty across the U.S. that Texas higher education institutions do not value diversity or inclusion. This would harm the reputation of Texas universities, making them less attractive to top talent, and reducing their competitiveness in a crowded and dynamic higher education marketplace.

Banning diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts in higher education institutions would also have significant and immediate repercussions, including job losses for Texans working in DEI efforts across the state. The impact of this would be felt most acutely by underrepresented minority groups, who have been the driving force behind many DEI initiatives. Vitally, this ban would constitute a blatant disregard for the progress made in creating more diverse and inclusive learning environments and would exacerbate the already-existing disparities in access and outcomes for students from marginalized groups.

DEI efforts have focused on creating support networks that increase the likelihood of success for underrepresented minority students, contrary to the erroneous belief that it excludes those with backgrounds who have historically been well-represented. In fact, ensuring the success of underrepresented minorities is morally imperative and economically wise for all Texans. Therefore, we must strongly oppose any attempt to ban DEI efforts in higher education institutions in Texas and urge you to vote against this bill. Rather than banning DEI efforts as a whole in the UT system, we encourage you to consider starting conversations with those currently involved in DEI to discuss the structure and potential amendments of DEI efforts. Only then can we ensure that all students have equal opportunities to succeed and that Texas will remain a leader in higher education, innovation, and excellence.

Citations/Resources:

1. U.S. Census Bureau 2020 (Decennial Census)
2. U.S. Census Bureau (2021 American Community Survey)
3. Quintana & Mahgoub “Ethnic and Racial Disparities in Education: Psychology's Role in Understanding and Reducing Disparities” (2016)
4. Swanson & Christopher B. “Cities in Crisis: A Special Analytic Report on High School Graduation” (2008)
5. Grinstein-Weiss et al. “Racial disparities in education debt burden among low- and moderate-income households” (2016)
6. Garcia & Weiss “Education inequalities at the school starting gate” (2017) https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED588751.pdf
7. Gibbs, K., Jr. September 10, 2014. Diversity in STEM: What it is and why it matters. Voices (blog). Scientific American.
8. Cook, A., and C. Glass. 2011. Leadership change and shareholder value: How markets react to the appointments of women. Human Resource Management 50(4):501–519.
9. Miller, T. and Del Carmen Triana, M. (2009), Demographic Diversity in the Boardroom: Mediators of the Board Diversity–Firm Performance Relationship. Journal of Management Studies, 46: 755-786. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00839.x