Republican bill would eliminate House Office of Diversity and Inclusion, created by Democrats in 2019
Should congressional staffers be such a “white House”?
Context
When Democrats reclaimed Congress’s lower-chamber majority in 2019, the party created the House Office of Diversity and Inclusion. Its goal is to encourage diversity among the House’s approximately 10,000-person workforce, who work for members and committees.
The office is led by Sesha Joi Moon, a black queer woman who was previously Director of the Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity at the government’s National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Although House Republicans opposed the office’s creation at the time, they made no real legislative effort to actually eliminate it. Despite being in the minority for the next four years, they never introduced an official standalone bill to eliminate it, even as a protest.
In 2023, since Republicans reclaimed the House majority, that’s changed.
In March, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ5) introduced a bill to eliminate the office’s funding. Then in May, Rep. Stephanie Bice (R-OK5) introduced a bill to rename it the Office of Talent and Development, still retaining the office in some form but removing the liberal-affiliated buzzwords “diversity” and “inclusion.”
Then in June, the House Appropriations Committee approved a spending package with a provision neutering the office. Still, that provision might not survive the final version of the larger spending package that Congress aims to enact later this year.
What the legislation does
Now, for the first time as standalone legislation, a new resolution would eliminate the House Office of Diversity and Inclusion.
It was introduced on July 27, as H.Res. 628, by Rep. Alex Mooney (R-WV2) — who, back in 2021, actually recorded a social media video for the office he now seeks to eliminate.
The legislation does not appear to have another, more “official” title.
What supporters say
Supporters argue that such offices are biased and foment division.
“These offices start with the premise that white people are inheritably racist and oppressive,” Rep. Mooney’s press release said, in a passage included as explanatory but not attributed as a quotation from the congressman directly. “The House of Representatives does not need bureaucrats promoting this divisive ideology.”
Supporters also argue the House doesn’t need an entire $3.5 million taxpayer-funded office to encourage diverse hiring. Instead, members can just… hire diverse employees for free.
“I would like to point out to my friends across the aisle, I do not need a lecture on my staff. I have a Hispanic on my staff, I have several females on my staff, I have an African-American on my staff,” Rep. Jerry Carl (R-AR1) said in a House Appropriations Committee markup. “They were hired based on their abilities and their skills — not the color of their skin, not their religion.”
What opponents say
Opponents counter that congressional staff diversity lags actual congressional diversity, but policy aides, schedulers, speechwriters, communications directors, and interns for House members should reflect the gender and racial composition of the country.
“The effectiveness and respect for this body is rooted in the fact that we are the body closest to the people,” Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL25) said in that same House Appropriations Committee markup. “[The] statistics show that ‘the People’s House’ has more work to do, which is why the Office of Diversity and Inclusion was created in the first place.”
“We’ve tried to do it less formally. We’ve tried to do it with encouragement, admonition, accountability language. Nothing has worked,” Rep. Wasserman Schultz continued. “Not as effectively as having a specific office dedicated to making sure that our staff look like America. Just like it’s important that the representatives who are elected to this body look like America.”
“So because I care about being staffed by more than just white men, I have to oppose this bill today.”
Odds of passage
The bill has attracted 15 cosponsors, all Republicans. It awaits a potential vote in either the House Administration or House Rules Committee.
Odds of passage are low in the Democratic-controlled Senate, at least as a standalone bill. Senate Democrats might be forced to swallow it as part of a larger appropriations package, as the House Appropriations Committee recently passed.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
This article was written by GovTrack Insider staff writer Jesse Rifkin.
Want more? Follow GovTrack by email or on Mastodon.
And for our “A Bill a Minute” video series — on TikTok, on Instagram, on YouTube, or at GovTrack.us on Threads.
Like our analyses? Support our work on Patreon.
