A novel bill introduced in the Ohio House of Representatives would prohibit the state’s public universities from asking for applicants’ preferred pronouns during recruiting and admissions.
HB 686 was introduced by state Rep. Gail Pavliga (R-Portage County) on November 7 and then referred to committee on November 12. The bill was already heard in the House Higher Education Committee on Wednesday, November 20, where Ohio Republicans struggled to provide data showing how applicant’s pronouns could cause bias.
Pavliga lost her re-election bid in the September Republican primary. Her term ends in early 2025. Such a quick assignment of bills for consideration is uncommon in the state Legislature, said Maria Bruno, former policy director for Equality, Ohio and founder Ohioans against extremism. Committee chairs have broad discretion in deciding when and how a bill moves through the legislature, as does the House leadership when it comes to votes.
Between now and December, the state legislature is in a lame-duck session – the period between Election Day and newly elected candidates taking office.
“Unfortunately, the Wild West is lame, but a bill that is introduced and heard just a few weeks before the session will be considered a bill that can be passed,” Bruno said. “It doesn’t seem accidental that the sponsor lost her [primary] re-elected and will not return in January.”
Other bills, such as HB 225, have not been considered. Introduced in June 2023, HB 225 would designate June as Pride Month. After being assigned to the committee, he still has not received a hearing.
Pavliga declined an interview request from The Buckeye Flame.
What HB 686 does
HB 686 would only add two sentences to the Ohio Revised Code:
“No state university within the meaning of Art. 3345.011 of the Revised Code may not use an application for employment at this institution that requires preferred gender pronouns or contains a field in which an applicant may indicate preferred gender pronouns,” the bill reads. “A state higher education institution within the meaning of Art. 3345.011 of the Revised Code may not operate any application for student admission that requests preferred gender pronouns or contains a field in which the applicant may indicate preferred gender pronouns.”
Pavliga, whose district includes Kent State University, said the goal of the legislation is to preserve the impartiality of universities, according to Pavliga. reporting from The Columbus Dispatch.
“I just felt like being able to eliminate pronouns really eliminated any bias in someone’s application, whether it was for employment or college admissions,” she told the newspaper.
The basis for her argument was provided in the testimony of her sponsor. Pavliga said she spoke with newborn adult Republicans who said that when asked for their pronouns when applying, they would refuse to answer. Therefore, the field must be politically biased because those who respond must be Democrats.
Pavliga did not provide any data to support this claim. According to her testimony, Pavliga did not speak to newborn adult Democrats.
Ohio Rep. Joe Miller (D-Amherst) questioned the validity of Pavliga’s conclusions, asking for more data.
“Can you give the committee something other than anecdotal evidence?” he asked. “Because I am a Democrat. My advisor is a Democrat and neither of us use pronouns in anything we do. So are we just trying to confuse people?”
Pavliga responded that deleting the fields would result in data collection. It did not further explain how institutions might collect data where this is a field I would collect this data has been removed from the application. She did not answer Miller’s question about what the data would ultimately show.
“We will strive to make higher education free from bias,” Pavliga said. “Therefore, using only the things that are relevant to an individual’s employment readiness, that is, work history, research and college readiness, will be the data that Ohio will now evaluate against.”
Other states, such as Arizona and Idaho, are “exploring such legislation,” she said.
“We would be trendsetters around the world [nation] and that’s why we can collect this data,” Pavliga said.
But later in the hearing, state Rep. Tom Young (R-Washington Twp.) also said the data wouldn’t actually be collected after all.
“We don’t collect data,” he said.
Pavliga also received questions about the impact of the act on the labor market Common application for students applying to state universities in Ohio. Both Pavliga and Young said it would be a plain change, according to employees creating the joint app.
“It’s not the elimination of the Common App at all,” Young said. “[Removing the pronouns field] is an option.”
When Rep. Beryl Brown Piccolantonio (D-Gahanna) noted that the question about pronouns on the joint application is optional, Young responded — without evidence or examples — that the question is not optional on employment applications.
Idaho State Legislature passed a similar law but with key differences: Their bill prohibits teachers from using students’ preferred pronouns, which do not correspond to the gender on their birth certificate, without written parental consent. This applies to primary and secondary school students and university students.
According to the Idaho Capital Sun, it also gives teachers the right to sue their district if they are disciplined for using a student’s preferred name and pronouns.
HB 686 will harm students and universities: LGBTQ+ supporters
Asking about a candidate’s pronouns is like asking a candidate for a salutation, said Amanda Cole, executive director of the Plexus LGBT & Allied Chamber of Commerce, an LGBTQ+-focused business organization in Northeast Ohio. Nearly 60% of Fortune 500 companies implement inclusive practices such as pronoun fields in both applications and signatures.
She said that by respecting someone’s pronouns, people can feel “seen and appreciated, and can showcase their best qualities, increasing both productivity and belonging.”
“Pronouns are not just a matter of personal identity; play a critical role in promoting respectful and accurate communication,” Cole said. “If Ohio universities are unable to provide students and employees with the opportunity to share pronouns, our state’s institutions risk falling behind in this fundamental aspect of inclusion, losing valuable talent and potential in the process.”
TransOhio Executive Director Dara Adkison condemned the bill.
“(Ohio lawmakers) would like to see the regulations not apply to public spaces, but we’re not going anywhere,” Adkison said. “TransOhio will oppose HB 686 and any other hateful legislation they come up with.” 🔥
START ACTION
- Share your thoughts on HB 686 by contacting members of the Higher Education Committee Here.
- Learn about all of Ohio’s current LGBTQ legislation by checking out our Legislative Guide here.
