Republican budget writers advanced a policy change on Tuesday that would place a prohibition on all diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in New Hampshire.

An amendment to House Bill 2, the policy language that goes along with the state budget, was introduced by Salem Rep. Joe Sweeney and would prohibit the state itself, as well as municipalities and school districts, from engaging in any DEI-related efforts, training or policies. No state funding could be used for DEI activities, including implicit bias training, DEI assessments, critical race theory and race-based hiring.

The attempt initially failed by a slim margin, with Republicans Jess Edwards of Auburn and Brian Seaworth of Pembroke siding with Democrats. Less than three hours later, the group reconsidered the motion. Edwards and Seaworth flipped their votes to align with the party. 

Edwards had said he didn’t want to bypass the normal legislative process, in which policies are reviewed by a committee and receive a public hearing. Sweeney introduced this bill on the last day of House budget conversations, as the Finance Committee is set to approve its budget on Thursday.

“We should not use the HB2 process as an end-run around policy committees,” Edwards said before the first vote. “I do think this is a substantial policy that’s worth a full and proper hearing.”

The proposed policy language also specifically targets public schools. If any public school fails to comply with the proposed law, the state Department of Education would “immediately halt” all taxpayer funding to that school until it does.

The state would define diversity, equity and inclusion as “any program, policy, training or initiative that classifies individuals based on race, sex, ethnicity, or other group characteristics for the purpose of achieving demographic outcomes, rather than treating individuals equally under the law,” according to the amendment.

Edwards said he and others perceive DEI as “a way to supplant affirmative action.” He cited Southern New Hampshire University as an example where he said some classes include socioeconomic questions that engage in a “calling out of a demographic to assign a group characteristic.”

“Aren’t we supposed to be judged by the content of our character and not of our skin? These are things that are happening and percolating in the sort of subterranean part of our culture that we see,” Edwards said. “We would like to make sure that we maintain the principles of equality and not try to find a new way to take a political demographic … and give governmental preferences to them.”

Rep. Jerry Stringham, a Democrat from Lincoln, said equal opportunity and DEI have a “laudable goal” to help everyone feel like they can succeed in the U.S. – but he said he understands where his Republican colleagues are coming from and thinks those feelings need to be addressed.

“These things sometimes get to the point where some people feel like they’re doing it at the exclusion of others, and that’s when we start to feel the friction between us,” Stringham said. “So, there’s naturally some pushback and we try to come up with other ways to achieve the laudable objective of opportunity and success for all Americans.”

The policy would prevent government agencies from renewing or entering into any contract that includes DEI provisions like programs, training or reporting obligations. All municipalities and school districts would have to submit reports to the state by Oct. 1 identifying their contracts that include DEI provisions, which the Department of Justice would then review.

While Sweeney said they wouldn’t terminate any current contracts, Democrats said they feared the ban on future ones would be a turnoff for businesses and open the state up to lawsuits when it comes time to renew contracts and amend those terms.

Although people with disabilities aren’t explicitly included in the state’s definition of DEI, Hanover Rep. Mary Hakken-Phillips said she believes they’d fall under “other group characteristics,” which would endanger special education and other disability services.

“I do not think the state of New Hampshire is possibly prepared to defend that in a court of law,” Hakken-Phillips said, urging her colleagues to “pump the brakes.”

Other budget updates

The House Finance Committee endorsed universal eligibility for Education Freedom Accounts, working off a projection from the right-leaning Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy that allocates an additional $6.5 million to the program in 2026 and up to $10.9 million in 2027. A contradictory estimate from left-leaning organization Reaching Higher NH had indicated the expansion would cost around $74 million, on top of what the state currently pays ($27.7 million). A Monitor analysis dove into the difference between those two estimates.

On Monday, Republicans on the House Finance Committee also voted to eliminate the New Hampshire State Council on the Arts, the Housing Appeals Board, the Office of the Child Advocate and other small arms of state government. Hundreds of job cuts are also in the mix.

The House’s portion of hammering out the budget is coming to a close, as the Finance Committee will approve a version on Thursday that’ll go to a vote  in the full House of Representatives next week. But the process is far from over   – the Senate will begin its edits once the House approves its version – and many things could change over the coming months.

Editor’s Note: After the Monitor’s print deadline, the House Finance Committee reversed its vote on the statewide DEI ban. The print version is now out of date, but this story has been updated to reflect the most recent events.