Diversity, equity, and inclusion do not seem to be driving public policy at the moment. Key policy brokers and members of the media are ignoring, reframing, or sanitizing public policy challenges. This unhealthy identity-driven approach to policymaking is undermining the integrity of our public institutions and their ability to respond to public needs. The blurring of facts, false narratives, misinformation, and accusations of corruption when someone does not agree are all simultaneously undermining our ability to hold public officials accountable. 

The impact of this disturbing trend of denying reality is proving to be catastrophic. For example, the US economy has just experienced its worst drop since the government began keeping records. It has contracted at a 32.9% annual rate from April through June. There is also an out-of-control pandemic that is being managed ineffectively at the federal level and inconsistently at the state level. The end result is recorded high numbers of new Covid-19 cases and deaths. As a rule, denying the facts in the policy realm does not lead to an equitable and inclusive government. It is also an ineffective approach to solving the needs of the public. 

Instead, effective governance requires an equilibrium between ideology, functionality, and problem-solving based on facts. This process, though, is not easy. It means being mindful of diversity, equity, and inclusion; inquisitive about potentially false narratives; triangulating facts; addressing inconvenient truths that don’t affirm our beliefs; involving people who challenge echo chambers of thought; eliminating terms used in propaganda; and acknowledging facts that run counter to what we would like our version of reality to be. Not following these steps can make us all susceptible to confirmation bias, hypocrisy, and partisanship. 

In this article, we will focus on the consequences of unhealthy governance. We will also outline 7 remedies that all people who care about the good of the nation can take to ensure diversity, equity, and inclusion in all policymaking initiatives.

Consequences of Healthy vs Unhealthy Governance

Effective governance that results in thriving communities requires that governments strive to solve impactful issues, matters, or obstacles that individuals cannot overcome on their own because they cannot be resolved without: 

• Collective action, 
• The mobilization of resources on a large scale, and 
• The coordination of the corresponding logistics to effectively implement a policy solution.

Public policies should be based on an intentional alignment of needs with resources and planning. However, when the equilibrium of effective governance is disturbed, the success of our public policies is left up to luck instead of solid strategizing. As a result, the potential increases for systems failures that alienate or restrict access to critical resources. Self-sufficiency, empowerment, and growth are then hindered for a significant portion of our communities. Ultimately, this translates into disparity, inequity, exclusion, oppression, discrimination, and unnecessary hardship. 

Ignoring, reframing, or sanitizing the severity of critical issues that require collective action does not mean that those problems fade away.

Ignoring, reframing, or sanitizing the severity of critical issues that require collective action does not mean that those problems fade away. In most cases, those issues persist for extended periods of time. More frequently, they worsen, as has been the case with the current pandemic, climate change, intergenerational poverty, homelessness, unexpected seismic economic changes, lack of education, racism, discrimination, oppression, etc. 

Thus, when all formal systems fail to solve complex social issues that individuals cannot solve on their own because they require collective action and the mass mobilization of resources, people attempt to problem-solve on their own. Some individuals seek to solve those issues through productive measures like creating support groups, donating to issue-based organizations, starting social movements, or founding nonprofits. These methods are critical in creating essential buffers against negative social outcomes by increasing diversity, equity, and inclusion. However, their reach is limited by their missions, which often address select components of complex social issues on a small or local scale. Furthermore, most nonprofits do not have the scale, scope, financial sustainability, or reach to universally solve these issues without working in partnership with the government. 

Others choose less productive or potentially harmful methods to achieve some degree of diversity, equity, or inclusivity. In this latter scenario, solutions are often uncontrolled and yield uncertain outcomes. Some potentially destabilizing solutions include the rise of undocumented or informal economies, discrimination against minorities, violence against different groups, etc. 

Informal ideological networks that establish communities of thought also begin to appear. These groups can generate either beneficial or harmful results in the face of seismic economic or political transitions. Some positive examples include protections for workers during the industrial revolution. Other positive changes include shifting social norms in order to build communities steeped in equity, inclusion, and fairness around topics such as race, class, religion, and gender. 

As the tools or avenues for problem-solving decrease, ideologically driven groups can aim to establish communities of thought that, either with or without merit, foment distrust in government and institutions. This can be a positive driving force that ensures accountability for the government. However, when ideology is self-centered and group identity is exclusionary, this incentivizes fanaticism and populism. In this scenario, the public good is no longer the goal of policymaking. Instead, the process is driven by self-preservation and self-interest. The result is that public policymaking moves away from problem-solving via systems. Instead, these groups begin to undermine institutions in a counterproductive manner. Rather than developing adequate replacements for their functions, they build in systemic preferential treatment for themselves. This creates different standards in the law where those who are not part of the in-group are penalized and those who do belong are rewarded or receive impunity when they break the law. Diversity, equity, and inclusion are almost impossible under these scenarios.

This process essentially uses self-centered ideology to support systems that are driven by the whims and personalities of their leaders. Instead of focusing on problem-solving, the policy process transforms into a system that makes decisions based on personality conflicts and self-preservation. The tools of government shift towards deception, false narratives, generating confusion so people do not know what is actually true, and oppressing those who challenge the status quo.  

The only way nonprofits can combat this assault on diversity, equity, and inclusion is through vigilance, protecting the integrity and neutrality of public institutions, rebuking partisanship, focusing on healthy ideology, and remaining focused on how to solve complex social issues. 

Public Policy Remedies

So, how can we combat confirmation bias, hypocrisy, and partisanship in order to create the equilibrium needed for good governance? The following steps are essential:  

1. Ensure that you check your own biases at the beginning of the policy process by triangulating facts. 

This includes challenging facts or ideologies you are prone to believe or disbelieve because of who is bringing them to the forefront. Ask questions like, how do you know this is a fact? How was the evidence gathered? Am I having an emotional reaction to a set of circumstances or is there concrete evidence? Have you checked multiple information sources? Is this an issue that can be solved by individuals, or does it require collective action, the mass mobilization of resources, and the coordination of logistics on a larger scale? Remember, diversity, equity, and inclusion involve other perspectives.

2. Engage stakeholders with diverse experiences or perspectives when creating or reorienting legislative initiatives or government tools. 

Modeling diversity, equity, and inclusion in the policy process is more than an exercise in practicing one’s values. It is a process that results in more thoughtful and sustainable policymaking. Thus, engage individuals with multiple perspectives and experiences when developing legislative language, regulation, grant requirements, policy priorities, and accountability structures to guard against any unintended effects. This will help develop effective legislative and regulatory solutions and systems that align effective implementation with the appropriate government tools.

3. Ensure the integrity of the policy interventions by creating systems that are neutral, objective, transparent, and outcomes driven. 

Neutrally adhering to the rule of just laws is the best way to achieve ethical governance. Equity and inclusivity demand that we guard against the capricious enforcement of rules, preferential treatment for one group over another, the institutionalization of injustice, and systems that discriminate. Objectively and equally enforcing the rule of law helps us to ensure that public officials and employees are responsive to the people they serve at all times.

4. Assume that there will be unintended consequences to a policy intervention, which will require the incorporation of protection mechanisms that allow for systems corrections. 

The legislative or regulatory language must not be overly broad or overly narrow so as to allow for formal and informal methods for modifications. An appropriate and delineated level of authority should also be assigned to those managing the process that allows them to make process modifications when corrections are needed. Furthermore, there should be clear triggers to initiate corrections through transparent policies, procedures, and appeals mechanisms to correct errors. This will allow for practices and outcomes to be aligned when unexpected consequences occur or implementation challenges surface. 

5. Build the federal, state, and local capacity of the responsible institutions needed to implement the appropriate policy remedies. 

This includes creating a well-delineated process for managing the coordination of the logistics needed to operationalize the appropriate solutions on a spectrum that ranges from the local level to the national level. This also includes establishing processes for how the change will be managed.

6. Identify legislatively mandated and sustainable revenue sources that provide sufficient funding to finance the scope, capacity, and reach of the policy interventions. 

This will help to ensure the sustainability of the policy intervention and that it is carried out faithfully and effectively. 

7. Build-in accountability mechanisms into policy initiatives that serve as a buffer against corruption, the misuse of public resources, the advancement of personal agendas, or the politicization of policy interventions. 

Government can only succeed when the people hold it accountable. Otherwise, public officials and employees with unchecked authority can become abusive, particularly when there are efforts to politicize the work government carries out on behalf of the public. In order to prevent unethical actions, transparency and oversight must be defined from the beginning and modified as the implementation advances. A process for designating an ethics reform process and new practices of care must also be established. 

Share Your Solutions with Other Advocates

Navigating the policy realm to ensure diversity, equity, and inclusion can truly be very challenging and difficult in the current environment. If you have any strategies that you have used to navigate the policy process, please share them below, so that others can learn from your experiences. 

Learn How We Can Work With You 

If you are developing an advocacy strategy or would like help with your policy analysis, do not hesitate to reach out and schedule some time with me to find out how we can work with you. Send me an email, and I will be happy to help. 

Please Subscribe

Please subscribe to Third Sector News, which will also provide resources and toolkits for managing real-life situations that those working in the nonprofit field experience. For example, this week, we have included a “Nonprofit Website Toolkit”. However, these resources are only available to those that subscribe.