New Act Dismantles DEI in Federal Science Programs, Restricts Agency Mandates on Childcare and Climate

The “Dismantling Ideological Policies for Semiconductors and Science Act” is a bill that lives up to its name. It’s a comprehensive effort to strip out diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) requirements from federal science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) programs, particularly those established under the recent CHIPS Act.

The Great STEM Policy Reset

Title I of this bill is essentially a legislative weed-whacker, systematically repealing dozens of sections across existing laws that focused on DEI. For instance, it kills the position of the National Science Foundation (NSF) Chief Diversity Officer (Sec. 108), ends programs that awarded funds specifically for research supporting DEI in STEM (Sec. 109), and removes diversity considerations from STEM research capacity programs (Sec. 106). If you're a graduate student or faculty member who relied on or benefited from DEI-focused grants, those funding streams are being shut off.

Crucially, it also repeals the requirement to collect demographic data on faculty (Sec. 114). Think of that data as a necessary tool for accountability; without it, it becomes impossible to track whether federal programs are actually reaching a broad segment of the population. The stated goal of Congress is to focus purely on merit and national competitiveness, but by removing the mechanisms that monitor representation, it becomes much harder to spot systemic barriers that might be holding back talent.

HBCUs and TCUs: Support, But No Race-Based Focus

One interesting nuance is how the bill handles Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Tribal Colleges or Universities (TCUs). While the bill removes race-based activities and references to Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs) in many sections (Sec. 117), it preserves specific language encouraging partnerships with HBCUs and TCUs in microelectronics education (Sec. 105) and allows the NSF to support training programs at these institutions (Sec. 112). This means that while the specific push for racial diversity is removed, the institutional support for these key schools remains, albeit in a modified form focused on workforce development.

Agencies Can't Force You to Offer Childcare

Title II is where the bill reaches beyond the science agencies and affects any entity—from universities to contractors—seeking federal funds. This section (Sec. 201) prohibits executive branch agencies from imposing mandates that aren't explicitly written into law. This is aimed at stopping agencies from using their grant-making power to enforce unwritten rules.

The bill lists specific policies agencies can no longer mandate as a condition of receiving federal money. These include requiring grantees to adopt policies on: prioritizing hiring a diverse workforce, providing childcare for employees, offering “wraparound services” like housing or transportation assistance, or adopting policies to minimize environmental impacts or fight climate change. For example, if a local community college is applying for a federal grant, the agency can no longer require them to implement a formal workforce diversity plan or offer employee childcare, unless Congress has passed a law specifically mandating it. This reduces the compliance burden on recipients, but also removes the agency's ability to drive certain social or environmental priorities through funding incentives.

The Real-World Impact

For busy people, this bill means two things. First, if you work in or rely on federal STEM funding, the landscape is shifting from one that emphasized equity goals to one that is strictly focused on technical output and workforce capacity, regardless of who is being served by the programs. Second, for any organization dealing with federal contracts or grants, the administrative headache of complying with agency-specific DEI, climate, or labor mandates just got lighter. However, it also means that efforts to use federal funding as leverage to improve things like employee support (childcare) or environmental planning will be significantly curtailed unless Congress decides to put those requirements into law.