Latest action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
Bill proposes to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion programs from federal agencies.
The problem
Supporters argue DEI initiatives waste federal resources and discriminate based on race or gender. Critics say these programs address historical inequities in government employment and services.
The proposal
The bill would require federal agencies to dismantle DEI offices, programs, and initiatives. It would redirect related spending and prohibit diversity-focused hiring or contracting practices.
The impact
Federal employees in DEI roles, federal contractors, and individuals from underrepresented groups in government hiring could be affected. Federal agencies' operations and spending priorities would change significantly.
Eliminating DEI offices and programs could save federal money currently spent on these initiatives. These funds could be redirected to other government priorities or deficit reduction.
Removing diversity-focused requirements from hiring could streamline recruitment processes and reduce administrative complexity. Agencies could focus hiring decisions on job qualifications alone.
Supporters argue removing DEI programs ensures federal positions go to the most qualified candidates without considering demographic factors. This aligns with a merit-only approach to employment decisions.
Federal agencies would face fewer diversity reporting and compliance requirements, potentially reducing paperwork and oversight costs.
Eliminating DEI programs could decrease hiring of underrepresented groups in federal agencies. This might affect how federal government reflects the American population it serves.
Removing programs focused on equitable access to federal services and contracting could disadvantage minority-owned businesses and vulnerable populations. Communities relying on DEI-related services might face reduced support.
Courts could challenge the bill as potentially violating civil rights laws or constitutional protections. Legal battles could be costly and create regulatory uncertainty.
Agencies with established DEI initiatives would face significant operational disruptions and retraining needs. Employees in these roles would lose their positions.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Other bills in this policy area
HR 10734
Title IX Take Responsibility Act of 2026
HRES 1493
Declaring unconditional war on racism and invidious discrimination and providing for the establishment of a Cabinet-level Department of Reconciliation charged with eliminating racism and invidious discrimination.
HR 10052
Right to Worship Act
SRES 819
A resolution condemning the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran for its ongoing human rights abuses, including its use of politically motivated espionage claims to justify arbitrary detention and executions.
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.