DEI in the Context of Oregon State Priorities (A Guest Blogger)

 

As a way of introduction, what follows is a guest blog.  Before starting, though, I did a public records request of the state about a year ago concerning how many employees were working in a DEI capacity and associated payroll.  I was politely told to pound sand.  Today's blogger combed the internet to create an engaging visual and an accompanying short post on the topic.  First, however, an illustration that shows one of my concerns with DEI.  During the Great Potato Famine in Ireland, there were about a million souls lost in the home country and another million fleeing abroad to Britain, Canada, and the USA.  They would often arrive on our North American shores sick as dogs and without a penny to their names.  They began accepting the absolute worst jobs the nation had to offer from digging canals (Erie Canal, for instance) to constructing railroads.  Mass graves of Irish laborers are often found in the areas of these construction projects.  The startling truth is that even slaves held a monetary value to their "owners," but the Irish...they just kept coming.  They became seen as disposable people.  A somewhat similar history befell the immigrating Chinese.  If you have read my novel The Blood Cries Out, you learned about the ambush of a large number of Chinese miners along the Snake River in May 1887 (not too far from today's Imnaha, Oregon).  The point is that there were many different immigrant groups treated deplorably, yet DEI completely ignores the ones that don't conveniently fit its narrative.

Oregon’s DEI Staffing: A Costly Distraction from Core Services

In Oregon, the state’s commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) has led to the establishment of specialized positions within government agencies. While these roles are often portrayed as essential for fostering an inclusive environment and carrying out the respective mission of each agency, the reality raises significant concerns about their necessity and impact.

The primary question is: Are these DEI positions effectively serving the public, or are they diverting resources from essential services? With state budgets under constant scrutiny, allocating funds to roles that may not directly contribute to public welfare is a contentious issue. The effectiveness of DEI initiatives in achieving tangible outcomes remains debatable, and without clear metrics, it’s challenging to assess their value.

Moreover, the creation of DEI roles can inadvertently lead to a culture of compliance rather than genuine cultural change. Agencies may focus more on fulfilling DEI quotas and meeting regulatory expectations than on addressing the supposed underlying issues of inequality and exclusion. This approach risks reducing complex social challenges to checkboxes on a form, rather than fostering meaningful dialogue and systemic reform.

In conclusion, while the intention behind DEI staffing is to promote fairness and representation, the actual impact on Oregon’s governance and public services warrants closer examination. It’s crucial to ensure that efforts to enhance inclusivity do not come at the expense of the state’s primary responsibility: delivering effective and efficient services to all its citizens.