Bill Overview
Title: To prohibit the availability of funds for the Department of Defense for organizing, promoting, or hosting drag shows as a means of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.
Description: This bill prohibits Department of Defense funding from being obligated or expended to organize, promote, or host drag shows as a means of implementing diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.
Sponsors: Rep. Grothman, Glenn [R-WI-6]
Target Audience
Population: People involved with or affected by DoD diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives related to LGBTQ+
Estimated Size: 3000000
- The US Department of Defense employs over 2.8 million individuals who could be impacted by funding restrictions affecting diversity initiatives.
- Diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives may involve events that promote understanding and cohesion among diverse groups including LGBTQ+ personnel.
- Drag shows, although a niche form of expression, may be part of broader cultural activities aiming to include LGBTQ+ individuals, thus impacting those who identify with these communities.
- LGBTQ+ service members and DoD employees might feel less recognized or supported if certain cultural events, particularly those significant to their community, are defunded.
- While direct attendance of drag shows might be limited to smaller groups, the broader implications affect a substantial part of the DoD's commitment to inclusivity.
Reasoning
- The policy targets Department of Defense activities, which directly affects those involved with or participating in DoD-sponsored diversity, equity, and inclusion events.
- The impact is focused on LGBTQ+ personnel and their allies within the DoD, potentially affecting their sense of inclusion and mental wellbeing.
- Those not directly participating in drag show events but involved in the broader diversity initiatives might also experience an indirect impact on morale and community support.
- Most individuals in the DoD might not be directly impacted by this specific policy due to its narrow scope, but the symbolic nature of the exclusion could have wider implications.
Simulated Interviews
Navy sailor (San Diego, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think drag shows on base help foster a sense of community and visibility for LGBTQ+ personnel. Without them, it's just harder to feel seen.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Army officer (Fort Bragg, NC)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't attend drag shows, but they are part of something larger. Stopping them feels like stopping progress.
- It may not affect my everyday life much, but it changes the culture we're trying to build.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
DoD civilian contractor (Colorado Springs, CO)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This decision undermines inclusive efforts. We need to ensure everyone feels part of the team, and this doesn't help.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Policy analyst, Department of Defense (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 30 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like this chip away at the progress we've made. It's not about drag shows alone; it's about visibility and acceptance.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Air Force pilot (Honolulu, HI)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I haven't attended a drag show or similar event, so I don't think this policy affects me directly.
- I can see how some may feel differently, though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Army National Guard member (Texas)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Supporting diversity in all forms is crucial. Even if it doesn't personally affect me, I see their importance.
- Taking one part away does more harm than good.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Retired Marine, now a civilian contractor (Virginia)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This feels like a step backward considering how far we've come.
- Even if this doesn't affect daily operations, it impacts morale and community support.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Senior Diversity Officer (Pentagon, Washington, D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our inclusiveness programs need consistent support, including cultural expression forms like drag shows.
- Losing this undermines trust built with minority groups.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 9 |
Army Reserve (New York, NY)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While this seems like a minor issue, it's a symbolic hit to diversity that resonates.
- Even for those not involved, it's a reminder of the limits of progress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired Army Officer (Florida)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We need to support all service members. Restricting expression for some is a disservice to all.
- This policy has broader negative cultural implications beyond drag shows.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $0 (Low: $0, High: $1000000)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $1000000)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $1000000)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $1000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $1000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $1000000)
Key Considerations
- Impact of the policy on the morale and inclusivity within the Department of Defense.
- Administrative costs to monitor and enforce the restriction on funds for drag shows.
- Potential indirect impact on recruitment, retention, and performance, especially among LGBTQ+ personnel.