In January 2021, Biden issued the Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government: https://www.whitehouse.gov/
Sec 2 defines equity as “the consistent and systematic fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals,” which is different from what Smalley et al. defined as “equal outcomes” (2020). Smalley et al. also defined equality as equal distribution of resources, which is less effective than the implementation of Smalley et al.’s definition of equity. The executive order seems to define equity as closer to equality, which is less threatening to those in power.
K.B. Smalley, J.C. Warren, & M.I. Fernandez (Eds.). (2020). Health equity: A solutions-focused approach. Springer. doi: 10.1891/9780826177247.
Sec 3 is very vague. It claims to “remove barriers” but does not specify the barriers or how they will be removed.
Sec 4 is focused on the studies that the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will perform in order to determine “whether agency policies and actions create or exacerbate barriers to full and equal participation by all eligible individuals.” Rather than implementing solutions to dismantle those barriers, the executive order seems more concerned with the question of whether systemic racism exists.
After 6 months, the OMB will report the “best practices” and “approaches” found in the study. It does not specify if those best practices will be implemented.
Sec 5 focuses on identification of the systemic barriers to resources that underserved populations experience. It does not discuss how those barriers will be dismantled. Sec 5 claims that the studies will determine “whether new policies, regulations, or guidance documents may be necessary to advance equity.” It is obvious that new policies are necessary to advance equity. It should even be questioned. There is already a field of research exploring how marginalized communities are suffering because of policies that exploit them. It is not efficient to conduct another study.
Sec. 8 promises to engage and “consult” with members of underserved communities but does not promise to implement any suggested policies.
The executive order does not seem as productive as it could be and has many potential loopholes. It feels like a way to pacify activists without implementing real change.
Written by Angelica Gondoputro