NJ Assemblyman Paul Kanitra Slams Democrats Over DEI Contracting Mandates, Warns of Lawsuits
Assemblyman Paul Kanitra blasted New Jersey Democrats for advancing minority and women-owned business contracting goals, arguing that taxpayers deserve competitive prices, not government decisions based on race or gender.
TRENTON, NJ – Republican Assemblyman Paul Kanitra is taking aim at New Jersey Democrats over legislation designed to increase state contracting opportunities for minority and women-owned businesses, warning that the measure could trigger another constitutional lawsuit. Kanitra, who voted against the bill, used a distinctly New Jersey example involving pork roll to explain why he believes government contracts should be awarded without regard to identity.
The New Jersey Assembly passed Assembly Bill A3496 on September 24, establishing a goal of increasing unadvertised state contracts awarded to minority and women-owned businesses by 30% within five years. Kanitra argued that the legislation prioritizes diversity goals over traditional purchasing considerations and questioned why lawmakers would advance a measure facing constitutional concerns.
Kanitra says Democrats ignored constitutional warning
According to Kanitra’s account of the legislative process, a Democratic member of the committee reviewing the bill raised concerns about its constitutionality and questioned why lawmakers were considering it. Despite those objections, the legislation continued through the Assembly and ultimately passed.
Kanitra said the episode reflects what he considers a recurring problem in Trenton, where lawmakers approve legislation despite warnings that it could face constitutional challenges. He argued that the resulting lawsuits expose the state to avoidable legal battles and potential costs to taxpayers.
“We’re going to get sued again,” Kanitra warned.
The assemblyman maintained that constitutional objections should be addressed before legislation reaches a final vote rather than left for courts to resolve afterward. His criticism focused not only on the contracting policy but also on the legislative process that allowed it to advance.
Pork roll becomes centerpiece of DEI argument
Kanitra illustrated his opposition to diversity, equity and inclusion policies with an example familiar to New Jersey residents: buying pork roll at the grocery store. His argument was that consumers care about the availability and price of a product, not the personal characteristics of the person selling it.
When shopping for pork roll, Kanitra explained, he does not consider the seller’s race, religion or sexual orientation. He wants to know whether the store has the product and whether the price is competitive, a standard he believes should also guide government purchasing decisions.
The comparison underscored his broader objection to using demographic characteristics as a factor in state contracting goals. Kanitra argued that businesses competing for public money should be evaluated on their ability to deliver goods and services at the best value for taxpayers.
New Jersey contracting bill raises questions about what happens next
A3496 sets a five-year goal for increasing the share of unadvertised state contracts going to minority and women-owned businesses. The measure’s stated objective is to expand contracting opportunities for businesses in those categories, although a contracting goal is not necessarily the same as a mandatory hiring quota.
Kanitra’s objections center on whether the state’s approach can withstand constitutional scrutiny and whether demographic contracting targets are appropriate in government procurement. His prediction of another lawsuit remains a warning, not a court finding that A3496 is unconstitutional.