PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 10, 2020
Department of State Inclusivity Act of 2020
This bill establishes measures to promote diversity at the Department of State, and it offers a formal apology from Congress for encouraging policies at the State Department such as the Lavender Scare, which resulted in the wrongful termination of at least 1,000 people for alleged homosexuality.
The bill establishes a Chief Diversity Officer at the State Department to lead inclusion initiatives, support recruitment of a diverse workforce, recommend trainings on inclusivity, and ensure continued compliance with applicable laws and regulations.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill requires the State Department to
report certain data regarding the diversity of its workforce;
conduct interviews with current employees, and exit interviews with separating employees, to receive feedback on workplace policies, professional development opportunities, and other issues affecting diversity;
expand anti-harassment, antidiscrimination, and implicit bias training and make such training mandatory for certain individuals;
develop a pilot program to use gender-neutral terms in evaluation forms;
review employee terminations to determine wrongful terminations based on sexual orientation and issue a report on the findings;
establish a Reconciliation Board to contact an employee (or family member) improperly terminated during the Lavender Scare and offer to change the employee's record;
establish a board to address issues faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex Foreign Service employees and their families; and
report on which countries refuse to issue spousal visas for Foreign Service employee spouses due to sexual orientation and recommend how to address this issue.
People & committees
Sen. Menendez, Robert [D-NJ] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.3430 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.3430 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.3430 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.3430 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.