An accounting of my actions on DEI
Elected officials rarely turn to long-form pieces to speak to their constituents, often with good reason, but from time to time I choose to give a full accounting of my actions directly to you, the residents of Utah. Sadly, most of our communications with elected officials take place in 280 characters or misleading headlines. I like to think that most of us still appreciate the respect that comes from being treated like adults and weighing complicated issues in a measured and constructive way. While nuance is a foreign concept in the politics of today, I have not given up hope that explaining the thinking behind specific decisions I make – even those with which you may disagree – will help you understand the spirit with which I have recently taken those actions.
Nuance takes time and I realize that you may not have time to read all 5,000 words about why I signed House Bill 261 - Equal Opportunity Initiatives, so here are three key takeaways:
It’s possible to support our diverse communities AND have concerns about the administration of DEI programs.
HB 261 continues to support programs that promote student success, protects freedom of speech and prevents discriminatory practices.
While we have made great strides as a state and country, we must continue to work together to combat racism. There’s tremendous value in getting proximate with those who are different than we are and I’m grateful for the many partners who are working to make Utah a more inclusive place.
The problem with DEI
Over the past few weeks I have been asked — usually by someone who is upset — about HB 261 or something I said in a press conference back in December. You probably know HB 261 better as the “anti-DEI” (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) bill. I usually start by asking the person if they have read the actual bill or watched the press conference. Inevitably, the answer is no. Instead they tell me they have seen the headlines, a tweet, or read a newspaper article. Sadly, the reality of those two things are often very different from the news coverage (but not always; there are several very good reporters in Utah).
Too often disingenuous media reports, and especially social media, are terrible places to have honest discussions about DEI. Any criticism of DEI programs are dismissed as made-up culture battles or, worse, signs of racism. For many, it seems impossible that a person could be concerned about the growing and divisive political ideology behind DEI and still be very much in favor of equality and diversity (it’s important to note that the E in DEI stands for “equity” - equal outcomes, and not “equality” - equal opportunity). But for a majority of Americans, myself included, that is exactly where we find ourselves.
It would be a mistake to dismiss or overlook the extreme changes in philosophy that have occurred on college campuses and other influential institutions, including the media and major corporations, over the past 10 years on the issues of race and DEI. We used to aspire towards the dream of Martin Luther King Jr. of a future where our children “will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” Now, Americans are accused of systemic racism for quoting these same immortal words of Dr. King. Up is down.
Many on the progressive left have abandoned the universalist aspirations of the Civil Rights movement in favor of a new and profound political ideology that focuses on dividing each of us into distinct identity groups. While I don’t have space to completely recap the history of this ideology or its tenets here, I highly recommend the recently released book “The Identity Trap” for a thorough discussion about the origins and problems associated with this new and radical philosophy. Written by a left-leaning author, it is a crucial dissertation on how well-meaning people and concepts can lead to dangerous outcomes that completely undermine the goals of its adherents.
Here is a brief excerpt from the introduction (note that the author uses the term “identity synthesis” as a replacement for wokeism or identitarianism to describe this ideology that relies on combination postcolonialism, critical race theory, postmodernism and often illiberal thought):
“[A]t the most fundamental level, my concern about the identity synthesis is not about the ways in which it has ‘gone too far.’ Rather, it is that the identity synthesis is, even at its best, likely to lead to a society that fundamentally violates my most fundamental values and my most ardent aspirations for the future. The lure that attracts so many people to the identity synthesis is a desire to overcome persistent injustices and create a society of genuine equals. But the likely outcome of implementing this ideology is a society in which an unremitting emphasis on our differences pits rigid identity groups against each other in a zero-sum battle for resources and recognition—a society in which all of us are, whether we want to or not, forced to define ourselves by the groups into which we happen to be born. That’s what makes the identity synthesis a trap.
“A trap has three key attributes. It usually contains some kind of lure. It is capable of ensnaring people even if they are smart or noble. And it usually subverts the goals of those who get caught up in it, making it impossible for them to accomplish what they set out to do.
“The new ideas about identity share all three attributes. They are so alluring because they promise to fight injustice. They ensnare smart people who are full of good intentions. And yet they are likely to make the world a worse place—both for members of historically dominant and for members of historically marginalized groups.” [pgs.15-16]
The press conference
On Dec. 20, 2023, I responded to a question in a monthly press conference about the subject of DEI programs in higher education.
My complete remarks — lightly edited to remove duplicate words — are included below:
Question: Suzanne Bates, Deseret News
Governor, you've talked about speech on college campuses, and how DEI is affecting higher education. In Wisconsin, they've tied funding for higher ed to some changes at the DEI in the public colleges. And I'm wondering if you think the Utah Legislature has a role to play in how this is handled?
Answer: Gov. Cox
Yeah, I think they do. And I think for sure, you'll see legislation. We had legislation last year, focused on the huge proliferation of DEI programs and policies in and on our college campuses. I think they've been highlighted in some of the things that we've seen at the national level, maybe most famously with some Congressional hearings with the presidents of Harvard and Penn and MIT.
And certainly, we're seeing some pushback. You know, I'm one of those people who have been pushing back on the proliferation of those programs. I think, again, I want to be very careful about how we talk about these things because I think it's important. It's very easy to just fall into the polarized tropes around these types of things on both sides. But I think if we're having an honest discussion, I believe that diversity is very important. And I think it is a worthy goal. I think that inclusion is absolutely critical. We value and and we pride ourselves on being a state that is incredibly welcoming, with refugees and immigrants and others. We've kind of been the poster child for how to do this the right way, how to respect people, and help people find success.
We lead the nation again, a new report just came out yesterday, or the day before that I saw around social capital and upward mobility that Utah was number one again, when it comes to our ability to, you know, if you're born in poverty, you don't have to stay in poverty. And so these things really matter to me. Maybe more than all of them, equality, which is, which is part of our founding documents. The Declaration of Independence makes it very clear. I love the idea that all men are created equal, but that comes before life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And I think that was very intentional. And so these are, these are worthy goals and important goals.
Sadly, I don't believe that what we're seeing with some of the programs, maybe many of the programs in our universities, is actually accomplishing any of those things. Two things have happened. One, there's just been an explosion in these administrative programs. I mean, if you just go back and look at the number of people in these offices, it's just astounding to me. I had no idea that there were these many programs, these many people working in these offices. And so then the question is, well, what are the outcomes? Are we actually making a difference? And we're not seeing any evidence that they're actually working. And in fact, what's happened is kind of this identity politics and philosophies have kind of infiltrated these, what I think were very well meaning ideas and programs, what we're actually seeing is the reverse. That we're drawing battle lines, and that we're using identitarianism to force people into boxes, and into victimhood. And I just don't think that that's helpful at all. In fact, I think it's harmful. I appreciate scholars like Eboo Patel who has talked about this. It's not saying that we all need to be the same, or that we shouldn't understand our differences. In fact, we should celebrate our different cultures, different backgrounds, different experiences, different languages, all of those things make us richer and make us better. That's why diversity is so good. All of the studies show that if you get people who are different working together to solve a problem, they can actually solve that problem better than people who are the same. And so these are good things. These are worthy goals.
But instead what we get is we get professors or employees who have to sign these DEI statements before they can even qualify for a job. And these statements are very political. And I thought for sure that's not happening here in the state of Utah. It is happening here in the state of Utah, but I can assure you after this legislative session it will not be happening here in the state of Utah. These diversity statements that you have to sign to get hired. I think that is awful, I mean, bordering on evil that we're forcing people into having a political framework before they can even apply for a job by the state. By the way, this is you know, from the state, these institutions are arms of the state. So these are government institutions, and they have a duty to uphold freedom of speech and all of these, again, constitutional issues that are so important to us. And so these are the things that we're all trying to grapple with, how do we do the right things in the right way, and do them in a way that helps everyone and lifts us.
So I mentioned Eboo Patel, who's you know, who says, again, it's not about sameness. We want everyone to come to the table. But it should be a potluck, right? Bring the best of you and the best of your culture and your background. And let's come together and let's have an amazing feast together. Sadly, instead of inclusion, the I in DEI, it's become exclusion. We all have to get into our tribes, we have to get into our own groups and I think that's harming real people on our campuses.
Question: Ben Winslow, FOX 13
So on that note, I take it the legislation will get signed.
Answer: Gov. Cox
Well, obviously, we'll work on the legislation and understanding what it is, and what we're trying to do. I want to know. You know, it's easy to just say, DEI offices are bad. I'm more interested in OK, well, what are we actually trying to do to help students who are struggling? It may surprise you to learn that basically, if you look at the diversity makeup of our state, and we're – it used to be said that we're, you know, Utah's the whitest state in the nation. That's not true. We're, I think 17 states that are less diverse than us right now. So Utah's changed and continues to change. It may surprise you that Ohio is less diverse than Utah, Pennsylvania, we're right there in those kind of that category of states. So when you look at the racial makeup of our universities, it matches really closely, what our state is right now. And so I think that's great. It shows that minority kids are actually going to college at higher rates than ever before in our state's history. So that's good. Now, if you look at, if you look at completion rates, if you look at those that are graduating, there is a gap there. And that gap worries me. Some of our multicultural students, they're starting, but they're not finishing. So we should be asking ourselves, OK, how do we help that, right? What does that look like? These proliferation of DEI programs haven't changed that, they haven't made a difference at all, which is where the focus should be.
And also, again, we should be using these offices to help everyone. I want everyone to finish. There are too many white kids that are starting college and not finishing. But telling kids that the reason you're not doing this or can't do this is because of your race is very unhealthy. Let's remove barriers. Let's work together to help everyone. And we can do that. You know who else is struggling right now in college when it comes to starting college and finishing college? Men have dropped off a cliff over the past 20 years. We don't talk about it much anymore because it used to be the other way, right? It used to be there was a huge gap between men and women. Women were not going to college, women were not graduating from college. Now it's completely flipped. And so we should be very worried about that. That's something that we should absolutely be working on as well.
Rural kids, rural kids are struggling, rural kids do not go to college at the same rates as their peers, even minority peers and in other places. And when they do, again, they're not finishing. So how can we lift everyone instead of trying, this is not a zero-sum game. And I'm so tired of the false choices. If you're opposed to the kind of the identitarianism of DEI, then you're racist. That's not true. I care deeply about our brown kids and our black kids. I care deeply about all of our children, and we should be trying to help them. We absolutely should be trying to help them. But the way we're doing it right now, one, it's not working. And two, I don't think it's, I just don't think it's positive or helpful. Sorry, that's more than you wanted.
I hope you will forgive the length of that response, but I think it’s important to understand things in their full context. While I regret and have previously apologized for using the phrase “bordering on evil” when referring to using the power of the state to force a political ideology onto those seeking employment, that was the only part of a much longer and nuanced answer that most people heard about. Unfortunately, it is harder than ever before to have rational and nuanced debates about controversial topics today.
As one University of Utah professor wrote in a letter to the editor:
“While the [Salt Lake Tribune’s articles on the press conference] are informative, their underlying purpose seems to be to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the governor’s concerns. As someone who has taught at the university level for more than two decades, and who has watched in dismay as the zero-sum, DEI mindset has infiltrated higher education, Cox’s concerns are not only legitimate, they are commendable.
“Nothing is more crucial to the perpetuation of a bad idea than the misrepresentation of anything or anyone who disagrees with it. Take, for instance, the first sentence of the article…’Gov. Spencer Cox attacked diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs at Utah’s colleges and universities, repeating his assertion that such initiatives foster divisiveness instead of inclusivity, during his monthly news conference Wednesday.’
“With a lede and first sentence like this, readers might reasonably wonder how exactly Cox ‘attacked’ DEI. Unfortunately, neither article answers this question, so I watched the news conference. Far from what the article would have me believe, I found Cox’s discussion of DEI to be both measured and honest as well as contrary to the prevailing DEI orthodoxy. Thus, according to the interpretation offered by the article, to disagree with DEI is to ‘attack’ it.”
The bill
On Jan. 30, 2024, the Utah Legislature voted 23-6 and 60-14-1 to send HB 261 to my desk. A veto-proof majority is 20 votes in the Senate and 50 in the House of Representatives. On Jan. 30, I signed the bill.
What does the bill do? The core change made in HB 261 can be found in lines 246-248 of the bill:
"An institution shall ensure that all students have access to programs providing student success and support." The bill further defines "student success and support" as "an office, division, employment position, or other unit of an institution established or maintained to provide support, guidance, and resources that equip all students, including all students at higher risk of not completing a certificate or degree, with experiences and opportunities for success in each student's academic and career goals, and without excluding individuals on the basis of an individual's personal identity characteristics."
If a student needs help, Utah colleges and universities will provide help without excluding any students. And with only 40% of Utah college students completing a degree or certificate, there are many in need of extra assistance.
That's the core of the bill.
In addition, the bill requires that institutions of higher education protect freedom of speech on campuses and in government offices. The bill ensures that higher education institutions remain a free marketplace of ideas and knowledge and protects free speech and open dialogue on our college campuses. It also requires the institutions themselves to be neutral arbiters in this marketplace of ideas without requiring political litmus tests of its students or employees. This includes not requiring job applicants to provide submissions or attend required trainings that promote specific political ideologies. Finally, the bill prevents discriminatory practices based on an individual's race, color, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, age, gender, religion or gender identity.
By comparison, what have other states recently done?
In North Carolina, hardly a conservative bastion, state leaders recently prohibited the use of diversity statements in any hiring process.
In Wisconsin, a state which President Biden won in the 2020 presidential election, state leaders cut DEI programs in colleges and universities in exchange for pay increases for all college employees and a new building at the University of Wisconsin.
In Iowa, another purple state, leaders cut all DEI programs with a narrow carve-out for those absolutely necessary to maintain federal funding. This included more than $5.4 million in salary cuts alone.
Utah decided to chart a different path. I’m grateful to the Legislature for not following the lead of other states that simply eliminated DEI funding with no alternative path for students who may be struggling. Instead, this funding will be repurposed to help all Utah students succeed regardless of their background.
A tale of two statements
I was struck by two different statements recently shared with the local Utah media. I have stripped both statements of their personal identifying information.
Quote #1: "DEI is not just about race, it includes all students, whether you are first generation to college, from a rural town, have a different culture than your peers or if you came from a low-income background. DEI is one way to make sure that students from unique places in the world can achieve the same as their more well-resourced peers…DEI is not meant to exclude anyone or privilege one group."
Quote #2: “Everyone deserves the support they need to succeed. Higher education institutions play a key role in preparing students for the future…[We must] support all students and faculty while promoting an environment of free, diverse and open opinions.”
One of those quotes was from the white female Republican sponsor of HB 261 in an effort to convince her colleagues to support the bill. The other statement is from a queer physics professor of color at the University of Utah who specializes in gender, race and LGBTQ+ issues in the sciences who urged legislators to oppose HB 261. As you can see, both used nearly identical language saying that we should help all students no matter their background. One wanted to expand DEI funding to include all students. And the other argued that we must not change DEI funding because it benefits all students.
I'm afraid that in our shouting, we have stopped listening to the actual words we are saying. Unfortunately, the conflict entrepreneurs are desperate for the latest click, and as we know from social media algorithms, nothing sells better than anger.
At the core of the issue is this simple question: Can you be supportive of diversity and still raise concerns with the way in which $3.2 million in DEI operations are administered?
If the answer is no, then I'm afraid many of us, myself included, will forever be cast as hypocrites, racists, or worse.
Remembering our past for a better future
I still believe that it is possible to adopt a universalist view of society that sees each of us as truly equals. Government can and must be race-blind, but that does not make us racism-blind. To quote “The Identity Trap” again:
“To favor race-neutral public policies is neither to be complacent in combating ongoing racial discrimination nor to blind ourselves to the persistent realities of racism. This is a distinction that everybody should, in principle, be willing to acknowledge. And it is made all the more powerful because race-blind policies that aim to alleviate poverty and offer opportunity can, to a much greater extent than many now realize, help to address historical injustices.” [pg. 214]
While I don’t have the time and space here to discuss all the ways we can work in a race-neutral way to address these gaps, one critical way is to focus on equality of opportunity. While government cannot — and should not — guarantee equal outcomes (or equity, the “E” in DEI), government can — and must — work to make sure that everyone has equal opportunity, regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation. Nowhere is this more important than in our public schools.
One of the greatest disparities in the United States is the way we fund our local schools through property taxes. This means that schools and students in affluent neighborhoods will inevitably have significantly more funding and opportunities than schools in minority or rural neighborhoods. Fortunately, the Utah Constitution guarantees a high quality education for every student, regardless of zip code. When we ran for office, Lt. Gov. Henderson and I promised to work with the Legislature to provide more funding for Title 1 schools and at-risk students. I’m proud to report that we are delivering on that promise. With a new funding mechanism for at-risk students and the largest raises for teachers in our state’s history, Utah is now ranked as the best state in the nation for closing the gap in funding between high-poverty districts and low-poverty ones. While we still have a long way to go, this focus on educational opportunity is blessing the lives and futures of black kids and brown kids on the west side of SLC as well as white kids in struggling rural counties.
Another way that we can help to understand the distinction between race-blind and racism-blind is to better understand the history of our country, including the times when we fell short of the ideals of equality enshrined in our founding documents as well as the incredible heroes who worked to overcome those mistakes. We must always remember the sin of slavery as well as the oppression that has occurred for so many. We must never erase from our textbooks names like Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, Rosa Parks, and Martin Luther King. But we must also remember to never forget the stories of local Utahns who stood up to racial oppression in our own midst. We have made real progress towards a more perfect union, and that should be celebrated.
Remember the actions of Utahns like Mary Bankhead who successfully stood up to powerful community leaders in the 1930s that sought to push black Utahns out of their homes and into newly designated black housing districts. This wasn't in the Deep South. This was Utah, and thankfully Mary and others like her stepped up to prevent such an abuse from occurring.
We must remember that Utah never had segregated schools, but we did have segregated recreational facilities, hotels, restaurants, and social venues. One of the first recreational facilities to end this widespread practice was Lagoon, who under the leadership of Robert Freed and his brothers opened its doors to all patrons irrespective of race, something the Freed family considered one of their greatest life achievements.
Utahns should all visit the Topaz Internment Camp in Millard County and the Topaz Museum in Delta. Japanese American citizens were forced behind barbed wire and deprived of all constitutional rights. This wasn't just an issue in other states, it happened here too. One Topaz internee, Yoshiko Uchida, described this dehumanizing experience as being known one day as the Uchida family and the next as Family Number 13453.
And yet even in the stories of our collective past when we fall so painfully short, I am reminded of at least some slivers of hope in our common humanity. Uchida described her arrival to the Utah west desert of Topaz in September 1942 this way:
"There were no trees, or growth of any kind, except clumps of dry greasewood. We were entering the Sevier Desert some fifteen miles west of Delta, and the surroundings were now as bleak as a bleached bone. As the bus drew up to one of the barracks, we heard the unlikely sound of band music. Marching toward us down the dusty road was a group of young Boy Scouts who had come with the advance contingent, playing bugles, trumpets, and drums and carrying signs that read, 'Welcome to Topaz — Your Camp.' It was a touching sight to see them standing in the burning sun, covered with dust and making such a determined effort to lessen the shock of our arrival at this bleak desert camp."
That act by a group of young Utah Boy Scouts didn't make right the terrible abuse inflicted upon so many Japanese Americans, but it did bring a small balm of comfort to at least one struggling internee. While many of us will never be able to truly understand the personal plights our friends and neighbors are experiencing, I hope in Utah we can at least try.
As a leader of my faith recently taught, “Racism is manifested in many ways; some quite obvious like bullying, discrimination, ostracizing, and demeaning. Others are more insidious such as comparing, thinking less of, neglecting, or overlooking others…[S]uch behaviors and thought patterns must be completely eradicated. They can have no place among us. May we eradicate contention, discrimination, bullying, and racism once and for all from our midst. It stops here. It stops now. It stops with me.”
Every day I am grateful for the countless Utahns who work to make our state a more inclusive place. But this work can only be done by finding ways to get closer to each other — not further apart like the DEI of today requires. As the acclaimed author Bryan Stevenson preaches, “It’s actually in proximity…that we hear things that we won’t otherwise hear, that we’ll see things we won’t otherwise see. The things we hear and see are critical to our knowledge, and our capacity to problem solve.”
Focusing less on dividing and more on uniting does not mean that we need to leave our racial identities or cultures behind. As Eboo Patel, the founder of Interfaith America and an Impact Scholar at the University of Utah has stated, we need to move away from a DEI approach that is a “demonize/demean/divide paradigm” and instead replace it with a “respect/relate/cooperate approach.” “The guiding metaphor,” he states, “should be a potluck, not a battlefield.” (For a positive vision of what diversity work should look like on college campuses, please read Dr. Patel’s work here. )
I conclude with one last quote from Dr. Mounk:
“It is, I argue, a mistake to give up on the hope that members of different ethnic groups can come to have genuine empathy for each other; to put forms of cultural influence between members of different groups under a general pall of suspicion; to underestimate the dangerous consequences that stem from giving up on a genuine culture of free speech; to embrace calls for a supposedly progressive form of separatism that undermines efforts at genuine integration; and to make race-sensitive public policies the government’s default mode of operation.” [“The Identity Trap,” pg. 225]
I am grateful to the many members of our communities of color who have educated — and continue to educate me — on the difficulties that they face. We have much to learn from each other, and I hope to be a better elected representative for all Utahns no matter their political beliefs or personal backgrounds. I may stumble along the way in that effort, but please know that I love you and I love this place we both call home.