Republican State Rep. Bryan Avila says he read somewhere that Disney offered an employee program on diversity that said America’s founding involved “systemic racism.”
Well, Avila didn’t like hearing that. So he has proposed a new law to stop private companies from telling employees things he finds objectionable. Specifically, he wants to prevent hurt feelings.
His new law would ban any company from forcing employees to hear anything, like a discussion about racial injustice, that might prompt feelings of “discomfort, guilt, anguish or any other form of psychological distress.”
Yes, Avila — and the GOP caucus advancing his bill — want to use the power of government to prohibit private companies from discussing the topics of their choice with people who voluntarily work there.
The only speech tolerated will be government-approved.
Kim Jong-un would be proud.
I predict that, before this bill is passed, Disney will somehow be exempted — not because those voting for the House Blll 7 knows it’s unconstitutional (which it is) or because they believe in free enterprise (which they obviously don’t), but because these guys usually cave to their big donors.
Or maybe they’ll just whisper to Disney that it doesn’t really need to worry about this new law because everyone knows courts will rule it unconstitutional.
Still, this bill, which Gov. Ron DeSantis has named as a top priority, will probably pass in one form or another.
It’s a red-meat distraction issue for weak minds — minds too weak to understand the bill’s obvious legal flaws and too weak to process history or information that might upset them. It’s for the snowflake crowd.
It bans discussions that might cause anyone the aforementioned discomfort “on account of his or her race, color, sex or national origin.”
Maitland Democratic Rep. Joy Goff-Marcil, a lawyer, seized on the legal nebulousness of empowering people to seek legal remedies for hurt feelings. “Under this bill, you now have a cause of action for these feelings,” she said.
During a two-and-a-half-hour discussion in the House State Affairs committee this past week, other legislators stumped Avila by asking him questions about what his 27-page mess of a bill would actually do.
South Florida Democrat Robin Bartleman cited entities like the U.S. military, which have identified a history and culture of gender bias that they want to change, noting “These are uncomfortable discussions” and asking Avila if his bill would prevent companies from having those discussions.
Avila said he couldn’t answer that question.
But Avila and other Republicans had plenty of anonymous and unsourced anecdotes.
Jacksonville Republican Jason Fischer said he’d heard about schools with “anti-cop rhetoric” and teaching “one kid to hate another.” Where? Fischer didn’t say, but said: “I think that is a problem we are seeing.” Eloquently argued.
Avila said he had a friend (who he didn’t name) take a course at a university (that he didn’t identify) that discussed white privilege. “That is not something that should be allowed,” he said. “We want to make sure everyone feels comfortable.” Safe spaces for all!
The real target seems to be the critical race theory boogeyman, except on steroids. Republicans want to ban schools from teaching any history that might make people feel uncomfortable — but now want to take their speech-policing even further and ban discussions at private businesses as well.
Several legislators said Floridians would still be allowed to talk about Martin Luther King, Jr. (How gracious of them.) But if you start talking about things like racial inequalities that still exist today — and why those inequalities might exist — well, that might be a problem if it makes anyone feel angsty.
Bartleman, a teacher, wondered what would stop neo-Nazis — who made headlines in Orlando just last weekend — from objecting to Holocaust history lessons if a teacher dared suggest that maybe genocide was a bad idea. What if such statements made some Nazi’s kid feel “discomfort”?
The penalties for anyone causing such discomfort could involve civil actions based on complaints. The bill contemplates everything from $10,000 fines to action from the attorney general.
The crackdown would be authorized through Florida’s Civil Rights Act, which Orlando Democrat Carlos Guillermo Smith called a “twisted” way to warp a document meant to prevent discrimination by prohibiting discussions about discrimination. “It’s antithetical to what the Florida Civil Rights Act stands for,” he said.
Dozens of residents trekked to Tallahassee to plead with legislators not to censor history or speech.
“Unfortunately, the history of this country is dark and the treatment of many of its citizens is dark,” said Anthony Bryant of Orlando. “But it needs to be taught for what it is. If that subject is uncomfortable, it still needs to be talked about.”
Speaking of uncomfortable, poor South Florida Democrat Daryl Campbell heard all this discussion on his first day in the Legislature after winning a special election. “I am a Black man with locs,” he said. “It makes me feel quite uncomfortable sitting here right now.” But Campell’s discomfort seemed of little concern.
South Florida Democrat Marie Woodson, who is also Black, said: “My colleagues, I know that you are better than this.”
Woodson was wrong. The committee approved the bill on party lines. Locally, Seminole County Republican David Smith supported it and Democrats Guillermo Smith and Goff-Marcil objected.
If this bill is passed as-is by the full Legislature, it will almost certainly be tossed by federal courts. Government can’t tell private employers what they can talk about. Even the GOP legislators’ own staffers reminded their bosses of that in the bill analysis, saying: “The First Amendment to the United States Constitution generally protects the right to free speech.”
But these guys treat toilet paper with more respect than the Constitution when waging culture wars. So they’re trying to legislate speech they dislike out of existence — while claiming Florida is the most freedom-filled state in America.
____
